Thanks for the info Thomas. On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 10:01:08 AM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote: > > > > On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 9:29:30 AM UTC+1, stuckagain wrote: >> >> Speaking of j2cl and GWT 3.0 it would be nice if somehow the development >> did not happen behind closed doors. >> It would give us a better indication of where it is heading. I feel a bit >> anxious about the future because of this. >> > > J2Cl is a Google project. > AFAIK, they don't/didn't want to opensource it too early because they're > not ready to deal with external feedback and building a community, etc. > First impression matters and they don't just want a "code drop" that nobody > outside Google would be able to test or even build. They first didn't want > to opensource it before they were sure that it was viable; they're now > using it on Docs and Slides (and maybe Inbox too) so they're moving forward. > Because Google (googlers please correct me if I'm wrong) eventually want > to move all their projects out of GWT (2.x) and towards J2Cl (it'll take > time, maybe 2 years, who knows; and in the mean time, GWT 2 will still have > support from Google), and because the GWT Compiler is a complex thing that > almost only Google ever touched; the Steering Committee (please other > members correct me if I'm wrong) decided that GWT 3 would be (re)built on > top of J2Cl, *iff* that was possible (I don't have much doubts here) and > with a good developer experience (Google has specific tools that make their > DX much different from what the rest of us can experience). > This is a Steering Committee decision, a "community" decision, not a > Google one. Actually, we should expect Google to not even *use* GWT 3 per > se, but only J2Cl and compatible libs; GWT 3 really being a "community" > project (and Google still being part of it as providing J2Cl and sharing > libs). But this is still handwaving for now, as nobody outside Google has > seen J2Cl yet (the Steering Committee, and probably select contributors, > should have an early access to it in the coming weeks/months, to have a > better sense of how GWT 3 could look like, and possibly help in the > opensourcing process –particularly about using it outside Google, e.g. with > Maven/Gradle) > > So, we all want to see J2Cl, but keep in mind that J2Cl is not (and will > not be) a "community project", it will be (and stay) a Google open source > project (that GWT will use). > Google decides when it's OK to opensource it (they actually started the > process, but it has to go through the legal department, etc.), then the GWT > Steering Committee will decide whether and how to use it. > > This is all I know as of today¹. I too am eager to see J2Cl, though I > already have some ideas on how GWT 3 could use it. > > ¹ Well, actually, we know that J2Cl is invoked similarly to JavaC, and > they there's no notion of "super source": you just put the "emulated > sources" in the "source path" in place of the "JVM-only sources". This > means we could possibly keep the gwt.xml in GWT 3 and have it "drive" J2Cl > by passing the appropriate "source path" (and depending on how it works at > the API level, maybe reuse the ResourceOracle). This will have to be > decided, later, when we actually see J2Cl and can start playing with it a > bit. >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/b1afd130-8829-49c8-a259-e4fb3577b2ab%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
