Dan thanks! I am not an authority on GXP at all. I probably should not have used the term mature, and just listed my concerns since mature really doesn't mean anything. I am not against GXP or really advocating anything in particular. Just raising the issue. I think I agree, that researching what a good alternative might be and putting it on the roadmap might be a good idea.
~Michael On May 15, 2011, at 5:49 PM, Daniel Danilatos wrote: > I personally hadn't used GXP before WIAB but it wasn't very hard to > get up to speed despite lack of decent documentation. > > I initially was revolted by GXP, but after figuring out how to do what > I need, I think it's actually quite good. > * Your output can't possibly have malformed XML as the template is > embedded in xml. (somewhat like xsl). > * It further checks your output is well formed HTML. > * It cleverly escapes things "the right way" depending on what context > you're in. > * It's a small and lean library. > I won't bother listing the negatives, I agree with what Michael > already said (except the "immature" one - not sure what metric that's > based on or what the tangible negative side effects are. I haven't > come across any "bugs" or other annoyances yet, which immature > projects tend to have). > > Are we using templates that much at all? I think our use is pretty > minimal so it doesn't really matter what we do for the time being. > > Just trying to balance the argument. Eventually I think we should > probably stop using it due to the fact that it appears to be stale > (though I know it's used a lot internally, I guess they're not very > conscientious about pushing updates). I'm not sure if velocity is or > is not a good alternative, I'm not very familiar with it. If we switch > to anything it should be on the technical merits and relevance to our > project, not just because it's apache. > > Dan > > Στις 15 Μαΐου 2011 3:39 μ.μ., ο χρήστης Michael MacFadden > <[email protected]> έγραψε: >> JSP is not really in the same class as GXP, Velocity or FreeMaker. All >> three of these were implemented to account for the shortcoming of JSPs. You >> would need to read into the documentation of these projects for a detailed >> discussion on the rationale behind this. >> >> I don't know that we need to switch, I just have some concerns. Namely: >> >> - New developers aren't familiar with it. >> - The project isn't mature. >> - There are only two committers. >> - There haven't been any meaningful commits since May of 2009. >> - There hasn't been a release since 2008. >> >> Basically it looks like an abandoned project. I worry that it isn't >> documented well, and isn't being maintained. It's entirely possible and >> likley that some time in the future it won't be compaitble with the latest >> java frameworks, or at the least won't remain relevant. >> >> I am not sure how wise it is to build out our interface on that technology. >> It seems like it was primarily chosen based on it's associate with Google >> (basically eating their own dog food, etc). >> >> ~Michael >> >> On May 14, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Yuri Z wrote: >> >>> Well, I think JSP or JSF makes more sense than Velocity, but I don't think >>> we have a real need to switch. I also struggled with GXP when using it for >>> the first time, but when you get used you start to like its advantages. >>> >>> 2011/5/15 Lennard de Rijk <[email protected]> >>> >>>> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 17:45, Michael MacFadden < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have heard many comments from new developers on wave who were trying to >>>>> modify or add these kinds of pages struggling with figuring out how to >>>> use >>>>> GXP. I guess this is in part due to the lack of documentation. Is GXP >>>>> widely used outside of Google? I had not heard of it until I got >>>> involved >>>>> with WiaB. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Afaik not. Django is very popular but requires Python based projects :). >>>> I'm >>>> not sure what is often used for Java. >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Lennard >>>> >>>> >>>>> ~Michael >>>>> >>>>> On May 14, 2011, at 4:31 PM, James Purser wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I can +1 the bit about poor documentation >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think that the main advantage is that GXP verifies the HTML so it >>>>> ensures >>>>>>> that if gxp templates compiles then the HTML is valid. Also it is more >>>>>>> secure. >>>>>>> The greatest issue with GXP is very poor documentation. >>>>>>> 2011/5/13 Michael MacFadden <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> All, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am not advocating a change at all, just looking for some info... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I noticed that we use the Google XML Pages (GXP) technology for some >>>> of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> UI in WiaB. I understand why you would want to use a template based >>>>>>>> solution rather than raw servlest writing HTML. I also know what the >>>>>>>> benefits are over traditional JSP pages. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, what are the advantages of GXP over something like Apache >>>>>>>> Velocity? Just looking to understand. Thanks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ~Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> James Purser >>>>>> Collaborynth >>>>>> http://collaborynth.com.au >>>>>> Mob: +61 406 576 553 >>>>>> Wave: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >>
