-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Should we remove the included GWT SDKs from the plugin? #458
Comments
Agreed. Long term we could use this to encourage developers to use maven or gradle as well, rather than specific downloaded SDK directories. It would also be nice to stop checking in copies of GWT directly, but instead use the maven tooling to fetch what we need to test and build. Also, the GWT project historically doesn't backport fixes to old versions, so only the current version (2.10.0 as you pointed out) is supported anyway - following this reasoning, we should never have more than one or maybe two versions supported at a time. That said, we've had some recent pushback about it being difficult to set up a new project - keeping the current GWT version rather than forcing setup of the desired SDK might be helpful. |
@keinhaar I don't get the point. Plugin download is opt-in, you're not forced to download an SDK.
|
On the other hand, many users just check all and install. And the install size is huge on the server, to include a new copy of every old version of GWT on each update. Eventually that will add up. |
@protoism There are already some Warnings about a missing SDK from the Plugin
We could create a compound update site, so the SDK Plugins could be separated. That would still allow the users to install the SDK (also different versions) together with the plugin, but the SDKs would not be inside the gwt plugin itself. Or we could do as @niloc132 said, and add just the latest SDK. But that does not solve the problem completely, because then we would need to update the plugin, if a new SDK version is released. |
@keinhaar so you don't want to overhaul the plugin architecture,... It's just about SDK distribution. Here what a maven project produces Summarizing:
My doubt is: what is the SDK (not the GWT container) used for? |
Yes. At my company we have the SDK separately downloaded (version 2.10), and don't need the packaged version, but for beginners, it may be easier if they could just start by installing the plugin and the SDK at once. And yes maven does download the SDK anyway, but not every project is maven based. |
I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking me - we already have a gwt.version property that can in theory be set to different versions of GWT to test with (but shouldn't change build output as far as I'm aware).
What else is the SDK if not just the jars? Something that isn't shipped in GWT's jars (user, servlet, dev), but needed by the plugin itself? Or are you saying that the plugin can't function without the jars, and so the jars/SDK are needed for more than the project classpath? |
@keinhaar proposes to distribute separately plugin and SDK. Currently the build produces both. We need two builds, one for the plugin, one for the SDK. How would you organize these two builds?
I send you an image of the contentf of an SDK. There's docs, scripts, requestfactory, i18nCreator script... DTD, A lot of things which the plugin might be using, and which I guess are not available to maven. |
@niloc132 @protoism So it seems to work. Should we then create a new sub project? gwt-sdk-plugins? |
Hi all, @niloc132 any opinion about it We could even think of having an "aggregator" repo just for the composite site, and separate repos for gwt plugin / SDK / SDBG. |
@protoism, @niloc132 https://github.com/keinhaar/gwt-sdk-plugins It builds the 2.7 up to the 2.10 SDKs. You may review it there, but it should better be a separate project here: https://github.com/gwt-plugins. Because of my limited maven knowledge, i've just stripped down the gwt-eclipse-plugin project until it only build the SDKs, and added 2.10 support. I don't see any need for an aggregator repo, because the composite site consists of only 2 files with static references to the real repos.
|
Great job. @keinhaar
I tried to look on your repo for the gwt plugin branch without gwt sdk, but couldn't find it.
Can you just verify, perhaps you already did, that mvn verify (integration tests) works?
|
I think it's time to revive this ticket. |
We will need a new Project, but yes, i will look at my prototype and start right after 4.1 is out. |
@protoism |
Why we maybe should remove the SDKs.
Maybe somebody could create an Popup that asks for a GWT version if no SDK is configured.
Any thoughts on this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: