On Monday, February 28, 2011 7:39:03 PM UTC+1, zixzigma wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > I would like to ask your opinion on the correct way of organizing large gwt > projects. > […]
> can be summarize like this > > *Each Functional Area would have* > 1- client: pom.xml + GIN module + GWT Module (xx.gwt.xml) > 2- shared: pom.xml (would be interfaces for client and server to > communicate) > 3- server: pom.xml + Guice module (contaning DAO, Service, Servlet, etc) > > and an overall pom.xml which puts together functional areas + core + > commons modules (and corresponding pom.xml) > That would be the one with packaging=war, the web.xml, HTML/JSP pages, etc. - what do you think of this way of organizing projects ? > +1 to splitting client/shared/server into 3 distinct modules, with a 4th one to pull client and server together into a webapp (client and server both depending on shared). The question left open is: where do you think you'll put the GWT Compiler step? In our app (which we didn't split into modules on the GWT side, except for shared+client), we do the gwt:compile in the "client" module (which is with packaging=jar so m2eclipse imports it as a Java project, but using the maven-assembly-plugin to build a ZIP that's later used as an war overlay in the webapp). The net advantage is that we don't have to pay attention to dependencies (if I need to write a generator, I can add a dependency on gwt-dev without risking conflicts with other libs –because gwt-dev itself bundles a few libs–). It also looks like the "flexmojos<http://www.sonatype.com/books/mvnref-book/reference/flex-dev.html>" way of doing things, just replacing as3+mxml and flexmojos:compile-swf with java and gwt:compile (and which is IMO how GWT projects in Maven should look like). > - is there a direct one-to-one correspondence between pom.xml and gin/guice > modules ? > in other words, is it a good idea to have a pom.xml for each of our gin > modules, and > having a pom.xml for each of our guice modules ? > I don't think you should be thinking in these terms. It might be that there's a one-to-one correspondance, and I don't see anything wrong with this, but it shouldn't IMO be a goal, or a guide in deciding how to decompose your app in Maven modules. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
