...but not on it's technical merit. :(

Basically i need to assure the group that GWT is going to be around for
a little awhile and that we can start using this technology now.

A few questions..

What exactly does RC mean with respect to GWT being Beta (perpetual
beta?)?

Is this tech production ready? Howabout just for an internal app where
users may be a little more lenient? Anyone using it for real business
apps?

Is the closed-source compiler a sticking point for anyone else? How can
i convince others to just trust Google to fix bugs etc.?

I am really enjoying using the toolkit and appreciate all the work
being done.

Help me spread the word!

thanks,
adrian

Hi,

Nebvermind the RC. Of course is perpetual bug fixing.

But whatever GWT is in production level in many companies because you
can build more and better with the Beta in less time than with pure
javascript.

So welcome on board and enjoy.

For me the only black point is.
Does the GWT will be free forever ? It is the only real danger since
the compiler is not open!!! any answer google ?

Luciano

thanks for the reply, anyone else?

Does it cut development time?
Yep.

Is it easy for the less experienced programmers?
Yep.

Does it cut down on cross-browser problems?
To some extent, but there are a couple of gaping holes, e.g. standardising
text-size and the broken box, but you'd have that anyway.

Is it a good solution for any size of project?
Some debate on this, but MHO is that it is great for small web sites but
currently not able to cope with large sites on IE. Some people say they have
yet to have this proved to them, but my site is getting slow to load on IE
and it's not that big. It's a fairly simple concept to allow modularisation
(and thereby allow secure and non-secure areas validated serverside) but I
imagine it would mean a fairly significant change to the GWT architecture,
so whether we get that is anyone's guess, and the Google team are
traditionally just a tad tight-lipped about future plans. Like Tony Blair
said "I don't make predictions. I never have, and I never will." :-)

But it's still in beta...
So what, so is Gmail. Tha beta tag means nothing. Would saying it's gone
gold make it work better? Of course not. Just evaluate it and make a
decision.

But the compiler isn't open-source...
Most things aren't but they still get used.

And will GWT be free for ever?
Well this version will :-) But look at what Google give away for free right
now. They won't charge for that or everyone will switch away, and the cost
of GWT over the cost of the rest of what they do pales into insignificance,
and think of all the programmers and companies who would never trust Google
again if they did? Think of the loss of goodwill. But Google aren't going to
promise fee jam today, free jam tomorrow and free jam for ever, are they?

Would I recommend it?
For smaller sites and sites that can be broken into discreet areas of that
size or smaller, yes. If they fix the modularisation for larger projects,
then yes for them too.

But whatever they do, there will always be times where another solution is
more appropriate.

Ian
http://www.examples.roughian.com/

Hi, I'm using GWT for an intranet application. I am currently using 1.1.10.
I have not upgraded to the latest because this release is stable for my
needs. At some point, I'm sure I will upgrade, but that isn't a major
concern for me. I'm not really worried about the compiler being closed
because I use other closed technologies as well. I wouldn't have a problem
using GWT for a public application (if I had a public application to do). I
don't know what to tell you as far as how to pitch this to your team. I
found GWT and started using it and my results with it was enough of a pitch
for my team.

HTH,
Chad

On 12/5/06, Adrian Marti <marti.adr...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
There are two types of people in the world:
  * Those who need closure

Hi Adrian,

Glad you're considering GWT!

This is a wise question, and one that has been asked a lot before,
because it seems too good to be true. But it isn't...it's just simply
true. GWT is free, and it will remain so if not get even freer. See
Bret Taylor's post on a similar thread:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/browse_thread/...

Not to mention that the GWT team is growing quickly with some really
fantastic engineers.

It's definitely weird to have an RC release within a Beta product, but
I assure you that GWT won't be perpetually "Beta". With the big
adoption we've seen, it's hard to keep in mind that GWT has only been
available for less than 7 months :-) Coming out of Beta is one of the
top things on our mind.

Here's how I would think about. Even when there are bugs in GWT,
choosing an approach other than GWT invites your team to write a whole
host of other kinds of bugs in your own code that GWT would make
impossible (or at least very unlikely), including all sorts of subtle
JavaScript errors and browser-specific DOM errors. Not to mention that
it's much harder to debug JS than it is to debug Java source with GWT.
In other words, deciding against GWT in favor of writing tons of
JavaScript by hand isn't really a way to mitigate risk overall, it's
just trading one sort of risk for another. However, by choosing GWT,
you can benefit from the fact that there's a strong team of extremely
devoted full-time Google engineers working on your behalf to fix bugs
and create big new features that will benefit your project in both the
short and long term.

First, there are really very few compiler bugs, and even fewer that are
likely to affect you in normal work. Second, we take compiler bugs very
seriously since right now you cannot easily fix them yourself. So,
fixing compiler bugs is one of our highest prioritiest, arguably *the*
highest. Beyond that, all the real surface area of GWT is in the user
libraries, which are already open source. The source is included in
gwt-user.jar, and it's very easy to understand, debug, and patch that
source yourself -- which can be useful if you run into a bug that is in
your critical path that we won't be able to fix in a timeframe that
works for you.

We never want you to be stuck waiting on us, and we explicitly
prioritize our own work to keep the product in a state where teams like
yours can, in the worst case, help themselves.

Thanks! We are really happy about the architecture, and we think we can
extend it to add some very exciting enhancements, many of which have
sprung from some of the constructive discussions that occur on this
group.

Deal.

-- Bruce

hi bruce,

there is, and there will continue to be a huge cloud of fear,
uncertainty and doubt cast over gwt. imho your improved features, team
size, team talent, regression test suite and  imminent open source of
compiler/hosted mode env will not move these clouds away any time soon.

of course there is one event that can eliminate all FUD:

the next release of GMail client powered _entirely_ on gwt. once this
happens the gwt team will be forced to be agile, be more flexible with
their architecture, forced to listen and respond to the customer.

if and when this event ever happens, the industry will instinctively
know that the future of gwt is in good hands.

pls eat your own dog food on one of your largest investments and FUD
will be no longer.

rgds ash
http;//www.gworks.com.au

What a downer comment. I'm having a hard time understanding where this
is coming from. Aren't you being a bit dramatic here? What makes you
say there's a huge cloud of FUD? I mean, seriously, we're working very
hard to give you a great (imho) tool for free. What's the problem?

Why is this your litmus test? And why isn't your own experience with
GWT (and everyone else's) enough to convince you that GWT is worthy of
your trust? To draw an analogy, did you wait for Sun to rewrite Solaris
in Java before starting to develop in Java?

Who is perpetuating the FUD you're talking about? We're just trying to
provide a very useful tool to web developers. That's it.

-- Bruce

in Java before starting to develop in Java?

That would be more like writing the google search engine, clustered FS
and adsense in GWT. Ash is just talking about a parade product
everybody knows, like GMail. When I go to a customer and praise GWT as
an argument for fast and stable development, he'll ask me 'and who else
is using it?'. I can't answer much to that. And when he asks me 'and
why isn't google using it?' I've even less to counter with.

I trust GWT and have switched most of my web projects to it, why don't
you Bruce?

Surely a better way to look at this is that applications like GMail and
Docs & Spreadsheets are actually driving GWT forward?  The knowledge
and technology that Google has invested in the development of those
applications is the foundation of GWT.

Making GWT a general purpose framework is necessarily limiting in some
respects whereas the very thing that makes an application like GMail
great is that Google has innovative engineers trying out new things.
If those applications are constrained by using GWT then you'll probably
see less innovative stuff propogating into the framework, or at least
it will slow it down.

I do agree that it would be nice to be able to point to a reference
application but I don't agree that Google switching their products to
GWT would be beneficial to the near term development of the framework,
nor would it bring any compelling arguments for uptake of the framework
on any specific project - citing Google as using a Google product is
not a convincing argument for the long term support and development of
the product as free and open source.

I agree 100%!
My question was investigative, not suggestive :)