On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> I fully understand that we'll have to make some concessions for GWT
> itself to make it easier for Google (even though Matthew actually told
> me the opposite);
Well, our build system is turing complete, so theoretically it should be
possible to handle anything reasonable. The default build rules make it
slightly more convenient for us if source and classpath resources go in a
"java" or "javatests" directory (just like Maven makes it slightly more
convenient for them to go in src/{main,test}/{java,resources} by default),
but obviously we can cope with other structures since GWT doesn't use those
conventions currently anyway.
I actually expect as more and more external projects are adopting Maven,
it's likely we can push for our internal tools to better cope with
third-party projects that use standard Maven layouts. And because of that,
I think in the long-run in makes more sense for us to try to be as similar
to what a standard Maven project would look like, rather than some weird
mutant layout that no one's happy with.
Of course, that's just my 2c and might be fueled by naive optimism from
having just joined the GWT team. :) Also, I'm largely an
mg<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mg_(editor)>user, so it's possible I'm
overlooking issues with (e.g.) what our Eclipse
environment expects.
--
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.
