Bruce, I might be too late in replying to this thread, but I want to phrase my objections to what you've proposed.
A. Regarding Jetty: I think this will be a waste of time for everyone. Switching underlying servers is a "no value added" task (using Six Sigma vocabulary). 1). Many developers are using -noserver so for them this will make no difference. 2). Many other developers have customized the embedded Tomcat to suit our needs (I spent hours customizing it so that I don't have to run with -noserver). It will take hours to re-adjust again if you switch underlying servers. 3). Why? What's the benefit of switching to Jetty? Tomcat startup is like 5 seconds tops, which accounts for maybe 10% of the hosted mode startup time. You should speed up the compiler if you want to speed up hosted mode. I don't understand what Jetty has to offer here. I'd be happy if you proved me wrong here, though. B. Regarding the output directory structure: I feel the same way about this as I do about Jetty. I think this is a waste of time - no real value added to GWT. Most of us will have to re-tweak our ant build configs which is always a waste of time. C. Final thoughts I'm really looking forward to seeing something of substance in the roadmap for 1.6, because between what you've written here and what's marked with 1_6_RC on the issue tracker, I see nothing of any value except minor bug fixes. Here are the top 3 features that I think would add real value to GWT: 1). A way to get meaningful Java line number from Javascript exceptions thrown in a deployed production app (compiled with -style OBF) 2). Out-of-process hosted mode (to enable using different browsers in hosted mode). 3). A Declarative UI framework (one was started by Joel W. but seems to have been abandoned). 4). Speed up compilation Java 5 support would have been #1 on this list a year ago. You guys did a great job with GWT 1.5 - it included at least 2 giant leaps (Java 5 and the JSO/DOM framework), and I hope to see another big leap like that on the roadmap instead of features that add little value to GWT, like Tomcat vs. Jetty. In the end, if you decide to go forward with Jetty, I can come to terms with that, but I will need a good reason to upgrade to 1.6, like one of the 4 items on my list. Thanks for your time, Alex > > On Oct 13, 4:48 pm, "Bruce Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > Hope you're enjoying 1.5. > > > The GWT team has started putting together a 1.6 roadmap, which we'll publish > > as soon as we have it nailed down. Two of the areas we want to work on for > > 1.6 are some improvements tohostedmodestartup time and a friendlier > > output directory structure (something that looks more .war-like). > > > As part of this effort, we've all but decided toswitchthehostedmode > >embeddedHTTPserverfromTomcattoJetty. Would this break you? (And if so, > > how mad would you be if we did it anyway?) We figure most people who really > > care about the web.xml and so on are already using "-noserver" to have full > > control over theirserverconfig. > > > Thanks, > > Bruce --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to Google-Web-Toolkit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
