First off, thanks for the thanks, it's good to hear this project
helped.

Second, you might consider still using the shell, even if you need
JNDI, Spring, and other fancy stuff.  I do that all the time.  If you
check out the "Tomcat Configuration" page in the docs you will see how
you can configure JNDI and DataSources and so on, in the shell (also
see the simpledatasample app that page links to):
http://gwt-maven.googlecode.com/svn/docs/maven-googlewebtoolkit2-plugin/tomcatlite.html.

Now you may already know that, and there are times when noserver does
make sense, so don't get me wrong.  But, I usually use the shell
because then my tests work (the JUnitShell doesn't have a noserver
switch), and debugging is easier (still possible with noserver
though). Just throwing it out there.

As for splitting things up, I do that do, but there are many many
options on how to go about that. You can use Maven "composition" or as
they call it "aggregation," or both (http://maven.apache.org/guides/
introduction/introduction-to-the-pom.html).

Personally, I am not into all that jazz, and instead I just use
separate Maven projects and *GWT inheritance*. That is to say I have a
GWT "model" project that contains my serializable RCP model.  Then I
have a GWT "server" project that has by RPC service wrappers and
includes my non GWT service jars that access data in my environment.
Then I also have one or more GWT "client" projects that are the UI.
The clients use GWT inheritance to inherit the model and server
project.  The server project uses GWT inheritance to inherit the
model, etc. This was my Maven stuff is simple and clean, but I still
have separate projects that different teams can work on in parallel,
and my code is logically separated, etc. Also, this way, I am building
GWT libraries of widgets and services and such that I can re-use later
in other GWT projects (just like any third party GWT library you might
use). (Note that even my server and model projects, which don't
usually have UI, have multiple GWT module files, one that defines a
test/example entrypoint and is only used internally on that project,
and one that has no entry point and is the module inherited by other
projects.)

No one way is the "right" way though, just keep things logically
separated where you can to help with re-use, and parallel development,
and keep things comfortable to you.




On Oct 6, 7:57 am, joti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Group,
>
> at first: big props for existing and your help and the plugin at
> first, really removes the pain from GWT builds.
>
> I'm currently developing some enteprise app that uses a GWT-frontend.
> We're making use of JNDI, Spring and some other fancy stuff that
> creates the need for -noserver to be able to run our server
> application while testing new stuff in the frontend.
> Currently I do have a single artifact build that has everything
> included and am able to run mvn jetty:run with hot deploy of new code
> that got changed in Eclipse, a feature that is actually used really
> often.
>
> But since that "one big artifact" way leads to more and more problems
> (killing project portability and highly increasing buildtime) I took a
> look at the maven-gwt-sample that proposes an 3-parts split (server
> jar, interface jar, gwt-part that does webapp-assembling) POM
> architecture. I really to like that way as it sound quite reasonable
> and might really increase project portability, BUT:
>
> - If I need to build & jar the server part before running it together
> with the GWT part in the .war would that not interfere with the hot
> deployability?
> - Would I rather need to strictly devide beetween "now I'm going to
> debug Server Code and now GWT Code"?
>
> Any other ideas or suggestions?
>
> Thanks for your ideas and feedback :)
>
> Regards,
> Joti
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gwt-maven" 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/gwt-maven?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to