We vote for quarterly or twice year releases. It doesn't matter if they
are feature complete, only that progress is being made and all these
other projects like GwtMaterial use them. Nothing like being told when
asking about an issue that (to paraphrase) "You are using gwt 2.8, only
gwt 2.7 is
+1
as "Google uses a monorepo [...] This means there's no "release", every
dependency is a "snapshot", this is a sign of stability, I think it is
really worth to start releasing more frequently the Open Source community
edition.
Il giorno sab 2 lug 2016 alle ore 21:39 Jens
>
> But it also takes some time to write release notes for every release.
> So again, mostly a problem of time to spend.
>
I think if we take care on good commit messages and bug tracking we could
automate releases including good enough release notes on Github using their
API.
-- J.
--
You
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:22:28 PM UTC+2, Jens wrote:
>
>
> As said above, Google doesn't really care about "releases", except for
>> that they care enough about the community "outside" who, they know, do care
>> about releases.
>>
>
> @Thomas: And thats exactly why I think GWT will have
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:36:58 PM UTC+2, Gilberto wrote:
>
> Guys, threads asking if GWT is dead/dying shouldn't appear as often as it
> does. Actually they shouldn't appear at all. But they do. Something is
> definitely wrong. As community we should do something.
>
Glad you're using
Hi,
+1 on the regular releases. I am perfectly aware that this is an open
source project so nobody is entitled in asking anything. However with long
standing releases it is getting difficult to justify use of GWT in my
organization. It is much easier to carry custom patches or skip a buggy
> As community we should do something. In my opinion the communication is
> pretty poor and should be improved. GWT is "too blackbox" in my opinion,
> because of the reasons I stated before.
>
Its as open as any other open source project.
But if the communication is fine, it's just a
Guys, threads asking if GWT is dead/dying shouldn't appear as often as it
does. Actually they shouldn't appear at all. But they do. Something is
definitely wrong. As community we should do something. In my opinion the
communication is pretty poor and should be improved. GWT is "too blackbox"
> As said above, Google doesn't really care about "releases", except for
> that they care enough about the community "outside" who, they know, do care
> about releases.
>
@Thomas: And thats exactly why I think GWT will have a better life if we
would do fixed, automated monthly / quarterly
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:29:32 PM UTC+2, Gilberto wrote:
>
> ... and that's a problem, at least the way it is developed now.
>
> GWT is a more-or-less open-source project. While it is indeed open-source
> (you can look at the code), the process of developing it depends heavily on
>
... and that's a problem, at least the way it is developed now.
GWT is a more-or-less open-source project. While it is indeed open-source
(you can look at the code), the process of developing it depends heavily on
closed-source, blackbox projects made by Google, that nobody really knows
about
GWT 2.8 will hopefully be released
soon-ish: https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt-site/pull/181
Google is developing a new Java-to-JavaScript transpiler called J2CL
(Jackal) that might serve as the core of GWT 3.
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:56:03 PM UTC-4, H Maner wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I am
Hello all,
I am sure I am not the only one who noticed that new GWT releases have
slowed down to a crawl, significantly missed the announced anticipated
dates in the GWT.create project. We were long supposed be happily using
version 3 by now and, after only *one* beta release in all of 2015,
13 matches
Mail list logo
