On Thursday, June 6, 2013 6:27:57 PM UTC+2, Amir Alavi wrote: > > ...so what was the answer to this guy's question? > > And a follow-up question: Making GWT more maintainable makes perfect >> sense, so I understand the need to modularize GWT by externalizing several >> components. *But*, does that also imply that the Steering Committee as a >> whole would be effectively washing its hands of any responsibility to >> externalized components? >> > In the short term, it's not a question of "externalizing" things, only modularizing so you pick whatever you need in the classpath (the smaller the classpath, the faster the scan done by the DevMode at each refresh, and by the Compiler) In the middle term, we want to have separate release lifecycles for a few things, so they don't hold the release of "GWT proper". In the long term, I think the Steering Committee *will* wash its hands of any responsibility to externalized components (just like when deciding to deprecate something). Those components will be completely externalized, with their own maintainer(s) and release lifecycle.
I have the regret to say that one such component is RequestFactory: it looks like I'm the only one dedicated to maintaining it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
