This has been delayed for a while (maybe Q2 of next year?). We want to refactor the PagingScrollTable and incorporate a ListModel/TreeModel that would apply to multiple widgets and incorporate data binding. It will take some time before anyone has enough time to start working on it. Thanks, John LaBanca jlaba...@google.com
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Sripathi Krishnan < sripathi.krish...@gmail.com> wrote: > Reviving this old thread .. > > Has there been a decision on this yet? Just want to know if > PagingScrollTable is likely to make it to trunk in a future release. > > --Sri > > > 2009/10/9 Sri <sripathikrish...@gmail.com> > >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> >> Date: Jul 16, 3:57 pm >> Subject: Moving PagingScrollTable & Friends to Trunk >> To: Google Web Toolkit Contributors >> >> >> Frankly, we've vacillated on it. The problem is that the currently >> implementation, though full-featured, really doesn't scale especially >> well >> even to medium-sized numbers of rows. Trees have the same problem, as >> does >> any similar sort of compound widget. >> >> Increasingly, we're thinking that we should redefine the whole effort >> into >> designing a family of MVC-style complex widgets. This will require a >> lot of >> design work, and we're pretty sure we won't be able to get it done >> properly >> in the 2.0 timeframe. >> >> So, in terms of your planning, I'd say plan for it *not* to ship with >> 2.0. >> >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:15 PM, jay <jay.gin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I was under the impression (based on conversations with GWT team >> > members) at Google I/O in May), that moving this into trunk for 2.0 >> > was a sure thing. Has something changed? >> >> > I'll live if this has changed, I'd just like to know. Please...keep us >> > informed... >> >> > thanks, >> >> > jay >> >> > On Jul 16, 8:07 am, Isaac Truett <itru...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > Issue #188 has 40 stars, making it number seven in the issue list >> > > (when sorted appropriately). Let's shoot for number one before John >> > > gets back to working on it. ;-) >> >> > > So if you're anxious for PST to leave the incubator, star this issue: >> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=188 >> >> > > - Isaac >> >> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:58 AM, John LaBanca<jlaba...@google.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > We probably won't decide what to move into trunk until we get closer >> to >> > the >> > > > next release. I'm working on improving our unit test coverage to >> make >> > GWT >> > > > more stable, and most of the other UI developers are busy on their >> own >> > > > tasks. Sorry I don't have a better answer, but I'll escalate the >> fact >> > that >> > > > quite a few people have been asking about the table and would like >> to >> > see it >> > > > in trunk. >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > John LaBanca >> > > > jlaba...@google.com >> >> > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM, jay <jay.gin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> Bump again? Any status? >> >> > > >> thanks... >> >> > > >> jay >> >> > > >> On Jul 7, 8:40 am, jay <jay.gin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > bump. Anything? >> >> > > >> > On Jun 24, 10:31 am, jay <jay.gin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> > > Just curious if the effort has been resumed? Regardless, is >> there >> > > >> > > anyway for you to commit what you do have somewhere we could >> look >> > and >> > > >> > > provide feedback? >> >> > > >> > > thanks, >> >> > > >> > > jay >> >> > > >> > > On Jun 10, 8:28 am, John LaBanca <jlaba...@google.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> > > > @jay - I got side tracked with other tasks, but I'll pick up >> the >> > > >> > > > PagingScrollTable effort within a couple of weeks. The main >> > goal >> > > >> > > > when we >> > > >> > > > transfer the PagingScrollTable to GWT trunk is to separate >> the >> > > >> > > > concept of >> > > >> > > > scrolling (with three distinct tables) from the rest of the >> > code. >> > > >> > > > That way, >> > > >> > > > we can bulk render a single table element that includes the >> > > >> > > > header,data, and >> > > >> > > > footer and have it layout naturally. >> >> > > >> > > > @dflorey - I definitely plan to include all three of your >> points >> > > >> > > > into the >> > > >> > > > scroll table. Thanks again for all your contributions. >> >> > > >> > > > I don't know exactly how long it will take to integrate >> > everything >> > > >> > > > into the >> > > >> > > > GWT trunk, but its one of my highest priorities. >> >> > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > > John LaBanca >> > > >> > > > jlaba...@google.com >> >> > > >> > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:15 AM, dflorey < >> > daniel.flo...@gmail.com> >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > >> > > > > Hi, >> > > >> > > > > I'd like to support this effort and would be glad if some >> of >> > my >> > > >> > > > > changes would make it into trunk: >> > > >> > > > > - filters >> > > >> > > > > - column types for most frequently used column types >> > > >> > > > > (numbers,dates,text) including proper filtering, editing >> and >> > > >> > > > > sorting >> > > >> > > > > capabilities >> > > >> > > > > - simplified table generation ( see >> >> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit-incubator/wiki/TreeTable >> > > >> > > > > ) >> >> > > >> > > > > (TreeTable is not ready for prime time yet) >> >> > > >> > > > > Daniel >> >> > > >> > > > > On 10 Jun., 05:34, jay <jay.gin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > > > > I saw the initial commit of these classes into your >> branch, >> > but >> > > >> > > > > > I >> > > >> > > > > > haven't seen any additional commits. I'd love to take a >> look >> > at >> > > >> > > > > > the >> > > >> > > > > > current direction, and see what other input I can >> provide. >> >> > > >> > > > > > jay >> >> > > >> > > > > > On Jun 9, 7:12 am, John LaBanca <jlaba...@google.com> >> > wrote: >> >> > > >> > > > > > > We'll definitely keep these things in mind when moving >> > stuff >> > > >> > > > > > > over to >> > > >> > > > > GWT >> > > >> > > > > > > trunk. We've also found a lot of general usability >> > problems, >> > > >> > > > > > > such as >> > > >> > > > > the >> > > >> > > > > > > fact the the table doesn't layout naturally, which >> means >> > apps >> > > >> > > > > > > require >> > > >> > > > > active >> > > >> > > > > > > layout. During the transfer, we'll refactor quite a >> few >> > > >> > > > > > > things to make >> > > >> > > > > them >> > > >> > > > > > > more usable. Specifically, we'd like to provide a >> version >> > > >> > > > > > > that allows >> > > >> > > > > you >> > > >> > > > > > > to bulk renderer the header and footer into the same >> table >> > > >> > > > > > > element, >> > > >> > > > > > > eliminated the three separate tables and fixed layout. >> > You >> > > >> > > > > > > would lose >> > > >> > > > > the >> > > >> > > > > > > scrolling feature, but you would not have to use active >> > > >> > > > > > > layout. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > When we start moving stuff into trunk or while its in >> my >> > > >> > > > > > > branch (as in >> > > >> > > > > right >> > > >> > > > > > > now), thats a good time to point out specific problems >> or >> > > >> > > > > > > requests. >> > > >> > > > > Its >> > > >> > > > > > > much harder to change the API after we make an official >> > > >> > > > > > > release. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > > > > > John LaBanca >> > > >> > > > > > > jlaba...@google.com >> >> > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:01 AM, David < >> > david.no...@gmail.com> >> > > >> > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > Jay, >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > We are experiencing the same ideas here. We store >> column >> > > >> > > > > > > > ordering and >> > > >> > > > > > > > widths on the server but we have no way of getting >> > events in >> > > >> > > > > > > > the UI >> > > >> > > > > to >> > > >> > > > > > > > know when changes have been complete. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > wouldn't it be nice that the dnd was included as >> well, I >> > > >> > > > > > > > could really >> > > >> > > > > > > > use the DND of columns! Was it hard to implement ? We >> > did >> > > >> > > > > > > > not yet >> > > >> > > > > > > > bother to investigate since we have to focus on >> getting >> > > >> > > > > > > > functionality >> > > >> > > > > > > > complete first. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > David >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:00 AM, jay< >> > jay.gin...@gmail.com> >> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > > As I see that this has begun (yeah!!!!), I'd like >> to >> > throw >> > > >> > > > > > > > > out a >> > > >> > > > > few >> > > >> > > > > > > > > requests: >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > > * Please, please, please -- ensure that this is as >> > > >> > > > > > > > > extensible as >> > > >> > > > > > > > > possible. Here's just one example--I've integrated >> the >> > > >> > > > > > > > > gwt-dnd >> > > >> > > > > library >> > > >> > > > > > > > > to allow drag-n-drop re-ordering of columns. There >> are >> > a >> > > >> > > > > > > > > couple of >> > > >> > > > > > > > > funny corner cases, though, because I have no way >> of >> > > >> > > > > > > > > knowing when a >> > > >> > > > > > > > > column resize has completed. Obviously, if you're >> > resizing >> > > >> > > > > > > > > the >> > > >> > > > > column, >> > > >> > > > > > > > > you're not interested in dragging it to a new >> > location. I >> > > >> > > > > > > > > strongly >> > > >> > > > > > > > > encourage you to think three, four, five times >> about >> > > >> > > > > > > > > making a >> > > >> > > > > method >> > > >> > > > > > > > > private or package protected. Liberal use of >> JavaDoc >> > with >> > > >> > > > > > > > > strongly >> > > >> > > > > > > > > worded warnings to those of us who need to >> customize >> > the >> > > >> > > > > > > > > widgets. I >> > > >> > > > > > > > > know this cuts down on your ability to make >> > > >> > > > > > > > > under-the-cover changes >> > > >> > > > > > > > > from release to release, but it makes it so that >> folks >> > > >> > > > > > > > > like me >> > > >> > > > > don't >> > > >> > > > > > > > > have to resort to things like JSNI trickery or >> copying >> > the >> > > >> > > > > > > > > entire >> > > >> > > > > > > > > class or set of classes into our own code base. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > > * As a direct follow up to #1, fire some more >> events. >> > For >> > > >> > > > > > > > > example, >> > > >> > > > > > > > > fire an event when a column resize starts and when >> it >> > > >> > > > > > > > > ends. >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > > * Flexibility is great, but often I'm just >> interested >> > in >> > > >> > > > > > > > > the >> > > >> > > > > simple >> > > >> > > > > > > > > cases...simple. My example here is the multiple-row >> > header >> > > >> > > > > > > > > stuff. >> > > >> > > > > It's >> > > >> > > > > > > > > GREAT! I LOVE it! (And better yet, our customers >> have >> > been >> > > >> > > > > screaming >> > > >> > > > > > > > > for this!) But, I don't always need/want it. And, >> it >> > can >> > > >> > > > > > > > > make >> > > >> > > > > things >> > > >> > > > > > > > > more complex. One idea would be to overload methods >> > like >> > > >> > > > > getHeader() >> > > >> > > > > > > > > on AbstractColumnDefinition...add a version >> >> ... >> >> read more ยป > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
