While the information on this thread has become a bit passionate, it is all good and relevant information. When building large scale GWT-based apps, developers typically sketch out the foundation and then immediately start looking for a good widget add-on. Threads like this can be extremely useful when deciding which route to go.
That said, I would suggest we take this conversation offline as it has become a bit personal. Thanks, Chris On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Martin Kraus <martin.krau...@gmail.com>wrote: > Great - Yozons is already a confused person incapable of making any > decision by himself for *his* project and now you throw in another variable. > I suspect this might throw him in a further endless loop. Oh, btw there's > also gwt-mosaic and Vaadin. Make sure you evaluate those too and good luck > trying to understand Vaadin's server side GWT rendering - not that I'm > suggesting its good / bad. > > Anyone who thinks GXT license / commercial model is straightforward is > either uninformed or disillusioned. I'll just repeat what I've said earlier. > > Ext / GXT / Ext GWT have and continue to have a very deceptive licensing > scheme. It's licensed under GPL so you cannot use it commercially unless you > are will to open source you client source code *and* your server side source > code according to their very terms of use - which is very bizarre. Secondly > even if you do end up buying a commercial license at $329 / license, you > still do not have access to the bug fix releases. > > The $329 / license really doesn't get you much. Version 2.0 final of ExtGWT > was pretty much demoware with over 100 critical bugs. 4 - 6 months later > several bugs have been fixed but license holders are not > entitled to the latest bug fix release of 2.0.3. You not only need a > license but you need a support subscription to download the latest stable > version. > > See http://www.extjs.com/products/gxt/download.php > http://www.extjs.com/forum/showthread.php?p=393316#post393316 > > So the real cost of the license is $629 / license / year. In addition to > this be prepared to pay frequent upgrade fees for no good reason. Users were > required to buy upgrade licenses within less than a year of > the ExtGWT 1.0 release because they did an *internal* refactoring to clean > up the code and not because new features were added to justify the 2.0 > release. Ext GWT 2.1 is just out and they are already talking about Ext GWT > 3.0 which is essentially clean up of their internal code to support the new > GWT listener API's. What should customers pay an upgrade fee again for > something like this? > > A final word of caution - read the terms of their commercial license very > carefully and run it by your legal. It's not your typical commercial license > that you'd expect with a commercial product. They have some really severe > restrictions that might even require you end user / customer to buy a > commercial license of ExtGWT. If after reading their license you still think > its straightforward, then good luck to you. > > Martin > > > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Tom Schindl <tomson...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just to mention that there are other Widget-Projects besides SmartGWT >> and GXT. I'm working >> on a library called QxWT [1] which works similar to SmartGWT by >> wrapping an JavaScript-Library. >> >> We are (yet) not at the point where GXT and SmartGWT are but we are >> working hard on to get there. For me >> and probably others the main interesting things the license all this >> work is available which is in this case LGPL and EPL. >> >> In the next few days we are going to release a small bugfix release >> and the next release will hold support for >> optimizing the "native" library code by leveraging the tooling support >> we get from our upstream library >> (scheduled for first 1-2 months 2010). >> >> In alignment with QxWT release in Q1 there's going to be an release of >> an MVP-Library which has highlevel support for Databinding >> (to fairly any Domain-Technology you can think of by leveraging the >> Eclipse-Databinding-Framework) and other well known >> Eclipse Technologies like JFace-Viewers. >> >> Tom >> >> [1] http://tomsondev.bestsolution.at/2009/12/17/qxwt-1-0-0-0-released/ >> >> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:32 PM, John Armstrong <siber...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > There are a few strategies for DTO and GXT. Here are two >> > >> > >> http://www.extjs.com/helpcenter/index.jsp?topic=/com.extjs.gxt.help/html/tutorials/beanmodel.html >> > >> > I also did some using Commons::BeanUtils to autopopulate a DTO since I >> > use Cayenne on the backend and it was not serializing very cleanly. >> > >> > So far I've found GXT to be pretty good to use although DataGrids have >> > been, and continue to be, somewhat of a nightmare for me but I'll find >> > my way through. GXT + Instantions WindowBuilder or GXT have made >> > things mostly great on my current project. >> > >> > John >> > >> > On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Yozons Support on Gmail >> > <yoz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Thanks. I just read about that, which means it should be even easier >> to >> >> debug and work with for us Java folks. I like what I see in GXT so >> far, but >> >> admittedly very little. I'm most interested in the DTO issue and if >> there >> >> are good ways to send HashMaps and the like to avoid creating so many >> of >> >> them, or whether the benefits of DTOs outweigh it with the stronger and >> >> simpler typing. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> 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-tool...@googlegroups.com. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> >> For more options, visit this group at >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > >> > 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-tool...@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> > For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> >> 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-tool...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >> >> >> > -- > 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-tool...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. > -- 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-tool...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
