Thanks Gordan Krešić, Here is my "two cents".
I am in favor of J2CL adoption and I don't want to see GWT sharing COBOL's fate either. Yet, I hadn't realized that GWT has been under such a severe shortage of maintainers. But, I am wondering, what should we be considering as deprecated? Java7 support? I would say yes. DevMode with Embedded Jetty? I have to say no. Other? Probably yes. On Monday, 19 April 2021 at 10:16:25 UTC+1 Gordan Krešić wrote: > On 11. 04. 2021. 17:15, Jens wrote: > > > > Generally this would be a decision made by GWT steering group but I have > no > > idea if this group still exists. So I am asking here for a decision how > to > > move on. > > Although I contributed a thing or two for GWT, I wouldn't call myself a > contributor (I'm not even sure I'm allowed to post on this list), but let > me > drop my .2c. > > First, let me say that I both understand and sympathize for the cases > Elias > describes: when you have sufficiently large team and/or project, even > small > changes in workflow could be extremely painful. No one likes that and I > can > understand why not only Elias but probably many other may feel reluctant > (to > be polite) about any non-backward-compatible changes. > > Unfortunately, considering the shape GWT currently is, I really don't see > how investing into tech that has been deprecated for years could benefit > project in general. > > GWT is currently in desperate shortage of maintainers, up to the point > that > there are PRs not being merged because previous maintainers don't have > time > to review them anymore. If we are to save GWT, not only we should drop ALL > deprecated stuff ASAP, but speed up deprecation of features that we are > all > aware of that can't be maintained for much longer. I'll let others decide > which that are, but for example I just don't see any energy left in > community to provide full 2.x-level of compatibility while moving to > J2CL-based workflow. I hope I'm wrong, but these are MY .2c, so allow me > :) > > What I would like to see (and contribute to) is speed up adoption of J2CL > workflow (for example, docs are non-existent), even at the risk of > cannibalizing GWT 2.x compatibility work. When J2CL starts showing first > results in GWT community, only then we should restart work on providing > compatibility layer for GWT 2.x codebase and start modeling what should be > GWT 3. In other words: show everyone GWT still has a future (because not > everyone follows J2CL's repo commits like me :) ) and then existing users > may join in contributing support for existing code bases. > > Otherwise, I'm afraid that GWT is on route to share COBOL's fate: not > quite > dead, but definitely not alive either. > > -gkresic. > -- 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/8d22b337-a38b-46e3-9200-2f734dcd778cn%40googlegroups.com.
