i'd also agree with going the route of #2, and keeping GWT-RPC for convenience. yes, it's nice architecturally to say your client and server are loosely coupled via JSON, but in practice writing JSNI objects to read the JSON is hard to debug and can be rather tedious.
i did that previously with a grails backend, and because grails at that point was unproven to me wanted to be able to swap it out for something later and not even tie myself into a java backend. i wouldn't recommend it. unless you have requirements that you can't have a java backend or really don't think it's going to last, i'd keep GWT-RPC and have that attach to spring as the previous poster mentioned. you might also have requirements of different (non-GWT) clients calling your restful server side and still want to go with JSON, but again i'd think about having multiple input/output formats (GWT-RPC, JSON, XML, etc) all calling into the same services layer instead of trying to standardize on one input/output data format. hope that helps! ps. only my $.02, not necessarily an expert opinion. :) On Jul 14, 8:04 am, cri <[email protected]> wrote: > Definitely #2 for the reasons you mentions, with the GWT RPC server > side attaching to the Spring application context. > > On Jul 14, 6:15 am, Ernesto Reig <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello everybody. > > I have been discussing this topic with some collegues and we would like to > > know the "GWT community" expert opinion :) > > As the title says, the discussion is about the best architecture (or best > > practices) for building enterprise web applications with GWT and Spring, and > > the different options available are: > > > - GWT MVP front-end + Spring MVC + Spring architecture back-end*. > > - GWT MVP front-end + Spring architecture back-end*. > > - Spring MVC + GWT components inside html´s and JSP´s + Spring architecture > > back-end*. > > > *Spring architecture back-end is composed of several different maven > > modules/projects (separated by functionality) each one made with Spring. > > > From my point of view, the best option is the second one. With that option > > you are not mixing concepts nor using two design patterns together for the > > same thing (GWT MVP and Spring MVP), which I think is nonsense. Also you can > > develop the GWT part completely independent with the back-end part (with no > > Spring MVC in the middle). So you can make the front-end part with GWT, thus > > using the GWT best practices and features like Activities, Places, > > RequestFactory, etc. And the back-end part focusing on every module > > independently, using the technologies you want (Spring in this case) for > > each one. > > > What do you think about this? Every point is appreciated. > > > Thank you very much. -- 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.
