Re: [gwt-contrib] Elemental2 and JsInterop base beta releases available.

Wonderful news. Thanks! On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:47 AM David Yu wrote: > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:42 AM, 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors < > google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > The beta version of Elemental2 using the JsInterop specification has been > released o

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Experimental release of Elemental2

be > open sourced. > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:12 PM James Horsley > wrote: > >> I remember hearing that elemental2 was being generated from TypeScript >> definitions. If that's true, is there any chance we could get a look at the >> generator code too? >>

[gwt-contrib] Re: Experimental release of Elemental2

I remember hearing that elemental2 was being generated from TypeScript definitions. If that's true, is there any chance we could get a look at the generator code too? On Thursday, June 30, 2016 at 1:23:51 AM UTC+1, Julien Dramaix wrote: > > A new experimental version of Elemental2 using the new

Re: [gwt-contrib] Experimental release of Elemental2

This is brilliant. Thanks for sharing the experimental version!!! On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 1:23 AM 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors < google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote: > A new experimental version of Elemental2 using the new JsInterop > specification has been pushed on

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Trying to use JsInterop to work with React

Paul, brilliant news. Look forward to hopefully taking a look at your code if you're able to share. On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:15 PM Paul Stockley wrote: > Success! With some javascript hacking I have managed to get it working. I > can access state and props and set state as a result of an onClic

Re: [gwt-contrib] Trying to use JsInterop to work with React

Paul, any chance you're thinking of releasing your code on github or something? I think an open sourced ReactJs-GWT jsinterop wrapper would be something a number of people might be interested in using and contributing to. On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 9:45 PM Paul Stockley wrote: > I did think about t

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

When both Elemental2 and JsInterop are released I think that the community will start to innovate on this front and new libraries will pop up on github to address these needs; "if you build it, they will come" and all that. I know I'm very much looking forward to Elemental2 + Jsinterop as a platfo

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

tee the full backward compatibility with the > first version of elemental. > > > On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 10:50:26 AM UTC+1, James Horsley wrote: > >> Thanks for the update Julien. Do you know if Elemental2 will be at all >> backwards compatible with Elemental1?

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

Thanks for the update Julien. Do you know if Elemental2 will be at all backwards compatible with Elemental1? I was trying to decide on whether to use the Elemental1 interfaces for something I'm working on. On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:32 AM 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors < google-web-toolkit-c

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: [GWT2.8] RequestFactory lambda support

Love the idea of more lambda friendly RF methods but completely agree with Jens on the Promise/CompletableFuture approach being preferable. On 15 September 2015 at 15:30, Jens wrote: > I am pretty sure APIs will be enhanced for better lambda use over time but > that will probably happen after a

[gwt-contrib] Re: Steering Committee Meeting Notes (8/19)

Thanks! On 21 August 2015 at 17:48, 'Bhaskar Janakiraman' via GWT Steering < gwt-steer...@googlegroups.com> wrote: > See: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/14HaNSGd8-_1VOAQIKWGd4lKmcRQLciL2ISPhE18yOQ4/edit?usp=sharing > > Bhaskar > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Stop calling it GWT 3.0

Thanks Daniel. It's great that the steering committee are discussing the topic this early in the process; in particular, in the context of how GWT dev's can help themselves to be future proof (e.g. your Modernizing GWT talk). I completely understand how certain GWT generator based libraries tha

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Stop calling it GWT 3.0

I think that there's enough branding/momentum/etc. behind the GWT name that to be taken seriously it should stick with the GWT name, even if possibly adjusted slightly like Jens's suggestions. I'm fully behind the direction the compiler is taking and I believe that the vision put forward in the vi

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: GWT 2.7 release plan

+1 for John's patch 9450 ( sorry to devolve the thread into +1's ) On 9 October 2014 14:04, Thomas Broyer wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 9, 2014 10:43:38 PM UTC+2, Roberto Lublinerman wrote: >> >> I think we will better exclude the following thr

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: who discusses the next features and adopts feature requests?

Are there any best practices for open source projects to make integrating back into main GWT easier in the future e.g. license, code style, etc.? If so, it may be worth documenting them somewhere so that projects which are set up with the hope to integrate into GWT if successful can follow those gu

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: GWT-Contributors Hangout on Air Event

Completely agree with Jens. Love that these are available to join/watch but did have difficulty understanding some parts of what was said in the meeting room. Thanks for setting it up. On 28 August 2013 20:25, Jens wrote: > Just watched it and I think these hangouts are a great idea. > > Is th

Re: [gwt-contrib] Email notifications for gerrit code reviews?

for security reasons), one of the > commiters has to give at least a +1. This triggers a build. > > - Daniel > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:38 PM, James Horsley wrote: > >> There don't seem to be emails going out to gwt-contrib when I make >> changes to my cod

[gwt-contrib] Email notifications for gerrit code reviews?

There don't seem to be emails going out to gwt-contrib when I make changes to my code review (https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/c/2421/) is this the expected behaviour or have I missed a setting? Also, how do I trigger a presubmit build? -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-C

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

s the 6th highest starred issue on the issue tracker from what I can tell. On 29 July 2013 16:27, wrote: > On 2012/10/30 08:28:07, james.horsley wrote: > >> On 2012/06/08 17:20:06, rdayal wrote: >> > Yep, you're on the CLA list. >> > >> > On Fri Jun 0

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: GWT Meet-up 2013 Videos & Slides

Thanks for releasing these! On 15 July 2013 17:38, Jim Douglas wrote: > The folder isn't public ("You need permission to access this item."). > > On Monday, July 15, 2013 3:38:42 PM UTC-7, Bhaskar Janakiraman wrote: >> >> Hi Folks, >> The videos and slides from the GWT Meet-up conference at Goo

Re: [gwt-contrib] Work to do for bug 3042

Adolfo, To get the source checked out and compiling follow: http://www.gwtproject.org/makinggwtbetter.html#workingoncode To submit the patch use: http://www.gwtproject.org/makinggwtbetter.html#submittingpatches I recently had to move an old svn patch into gerrit and the following gave a very sim

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

James Horsley has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit. .. Patch Set 1: Will remember for next time. Thanks

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

James Horsley has abandoned this change. Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit. .. Abandoned Contains unintended .orig and .rej files

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Adds Map support to RequestFactory (see https://code.google....

James Horsley has uploaded a new change for review. https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3186 Change subject: Adds Map support to RequestFactory (see https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

James Horsley has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit. .. Patch Set 1: Ick sorry. Will submit a new patch

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

James Horsley has uploaded a new change for review. https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210 Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: RequestFactory Feature Request: @Immutable EntityProxy, reduced payload size, Map support.

Thanks for the udpate and good luck with the modularization work, I saw one of the dependency graphs you'd shared on g+ and it looked pretty gnarly =/ On 17 April 2013 23:12, Thomas Broyer wrote: > > > On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:17:25 PM UTC+2, James Horsley wrote: &g

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: RequestFactory Feature Request: @Immutable EntityProxy, reduced payload size, Map support.

Hey Thomas, Totally understand that modularization and mavenization are top priorities but does that mean my Map support patch need to wait until after GWT 2.6? I know things have been in a transitional period but I submitted the patch almost a year ago now and would love to get the support in; le

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: gwt rebranding

On 21 March 2013 07:44, James Horsley wrote: > I "Great" this over "Gorgerous Web Toolkit" but still prefer the recursive > definition > That was meant to read that I prefer "Great" over "Gorgeous Web Toolkit".. I really shouldn't rep

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: gwt rebranding

On 21 March 2013 01:06, Matthew Dempsky wrote: > My internal '3-word mission statement' is "Great Web Toolkit". ;) > I "Great" this over "Gorgerous Web Toolkit" but still prefer the recursive definition > I'd prefer "GWT Web Toolkit" over "Gwit Web Toolkit", but that's my 2c. > I think any "

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: gwt rebranding

I really like the re-branding idea; it's important to make the clear distinction, as Jens and Ray pointed out, that GWT's grown beyond being just a Google owned project. Ideally it'll be in a place where the question of "what happens if google stops working on GWT?" isn't even something that potent

[gwt-contrib] Re: Fix problem where hidden scrollbars prevent clicks through to the scrollable content area on Chr... (issue1886803)

On 2013/01/25 19:44:41, Andrew Bachmann wrote: I was going to submit the exact same patch, so can give a +1 for it working fine on chrome and FF on win 7. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1886803/ -- -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

5, 2013 12:02:54 PM UTC+1, James Horsley wrote: >> >> Anything I can do with >> https://codereview.appspot.**com/6132056/<https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>to >> help get it ready to go out with whatever release is deemed appropriate? >> > > Won&#

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

Anything I can do with https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ to help get it ready to go out with whatever release is deemed appropriate? On 13 January 2013 18:24, Patrick Tucker wrote: > Any chance these can get committed? > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1876803/ > http://gwt-code-rev

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

Any chance of http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524 making it into the release since it already has a patch out, or is that too big of a change for this point release? On 9 January 2013 13:26, Daniel Kurka wrote: > Hello everyone, > > we are gearing up for the GWT 2.

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

On 2012/06/08 17:20:06, rdayal wrote: Yep, you're on the CLA list. On Fri Jun 08 05:15:45 GMT-400 2012, James Horsley <mailto:james.hors...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just to check, was everything okay with the CLA I signed? > > On 7 June 2012 16:56, James Horsle

[gwt-contrib] Re: Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Just to check, was everything okay with the CLA I signed? On 7 June 2012 16:56, James Horsley wrote: > Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with it. > > > On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal wrote: > >> Thomas, thanks for jumping in. >>

[gwt-contrib] Re: Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with it. On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal wrote: > Thomas, thanks for jumping in. > > James, as Thomas said, we'll defer this to 2.5.1, but we'd definitely like > to get it in there, as it's an important patch. We just didn't want to

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about the plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a candidate for is great. Thanks again. On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote: On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote: > Thanks for all your help with the patch T

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Thomas, I've created http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1735803/ as you requested. Everything look okay with how I set the code review up? On 7 June 2012 10:22, wrote: > Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't > make it into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't make it into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps without having to use a patched version of GWT built from source internally. Certainly can switch to the patch being at the trunk/ level and post it at the url y

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Rajeev, get a chance to look at this yet? On 2012/06/05 10:50:18, james.horsley wrote: Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the handling of nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify the behaviour. To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the handling of nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify the behaviour. To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with() the syntax is theMap.keys.nestedProp and theMap.values.nestedProp. http://codereview.apps

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Adding the ".keys." and ".values." disambiguation was much much simpler than I'd thought thanks to the prefix variable being passed down so can have the codereview updated with this change very shortly. On 4 June 2012 13:07, James Horsley wrote: > I finally managed

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

s, I'll take a stab at that change. Let me know if there're any other suggestions. Cheers, James On 25 May 2012 22:06, Thomas Broyer wrote: > AutoBean has no equivalent to these "partial loading"; just like a POJO > has no notion of lazy loading, compared to JPA enti

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

I read Alexis's email too hastily and hadn't noted he was asking about nested complex types. I'll add some tests to see how it behaves. I'll be interested to dig into what AutoBean's behaviour is here as that's what I based on, mimicked, and leveraged for this patch. On 25 May 2012 19:38, wrote:

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

I added tests for complex keys and complex values which're passing so it should do yes. On 25 May 2012 17:01, wrote: > Hello > With your patch, does the function .with() works for a map for example > in an entity: > > Map(String,ServiceParam) params; > > requestContext.find(id).with("**params.Se

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Thanks for the update Rajeev. Look forward to hearing back on the patch. Cheers, James On 2012/05/14 17:04:47, rdayal wrote: Hey James, Sorry, I have not had a chance to look this one over, but I am planning to. The turnaround on patches has been pretty bad for the past while, and we're

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Rajeev, did you get a chance to look the patch over? I have no clue on what the turnaround is on submitted patches so hopefully am not being too pushy. I saw that GWT 2.5 is close to being released and I'd love to have this functionality available in it. Thanks! On 2012/05/07 20:28:44, james.ho

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

The instructions at https://developers.google.com/web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#submittingpatches say to add this patch to the issue (http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524) but I don't see how to do that. Is there a permission I'm missing? http://codereview.appspot.com/6

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

The latest patch should incorporate all relevant feedback. Including adding suggested tests and fixing where things when the tests failed. On 2012/05/03 00:10:56, t.broyer wrote: http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcess

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Will follow shortly with a patch taking into account the following feedback but wanted to get yours and Rajeev's feedback on some points before fixing others. On 2012/05/02 13:59:05, t.broyer wrote: Adding Rajeev as a reviewer. http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/we

[gwt-contrib] Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

Reviewers: t.broyer, Message: Thomas, I put you as the reviewer as I believe bobv, whose name was on the issue, is no longer on the GWT team and I'd noticed you're very well versed in requestfactory based on your community activity. Please let me know if I should add/change reviewers. Thanks! D

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: gwt issues marked as "patcheswelcome" don't show up under open issues

Aren't tasks like CellTable column resizing something that the GWT community are much more likely to have expertise in to implement locally and hopefuly contribute back (it is open source after all) compared with compiler optimizations and code splitting? I've been very happy with the speed improve