GWT-Maven 2.0-RC1 (potential last release here)

[Charlie Collins]

2.0-RC1 has been released:
http://gwt-maven.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/mavenrepo/com/totsp/gwt/maven-googlewebtoolkit2-plugin/2.0-RC1/

There are new samples, new archetype, new docs, the whole ball of
wax.

Changelog:
----------------
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-maven/issues/list?can=1&q=label%3AMilestone-Release2.0-RC1&colspec=ID+Type+Status+Priority+Milestone+Owner+Summary&cells=tiles

Please try out 2.0-RC1 and let us know if you have any issues. This
plugin is still be MAINTAINED, but we are trying not to implement new
features here.

Notes:
------------
This is the last big release of GWT-Maven, we hope. This release is
intended to wrap up many of the patches we had in the issue tracker,
and address other loose ends, with the goal of stabilizing and
freezing this project. (There may be an RC2 if any issues crop up in
RC1, but only if absolutely necessary.) Rather than adding new
features here, it's time for the developers here to start getting
familiar with and supporting the Codehaus Mojo GWT Maven Plugin
(http://mojo.codehaus.org/gwt-maven-plugin/index.html).

That plugin, the Codehaus Mojo GWT plugin, purportedly already
supports GWT 1.6, and has a few other features that GWT-Maven does not
have, while still maintaining compatability with GWT-Maven goals. The
developers there have merged GWT-Maven in, and using the same
approaches we created and honed over the years here for that plugin
(it should work pretty well, after a quick glance at the source and
such). We (the GWT-Maven developers) have not yet used or become
familiar with that plugin, but that is the next step. We will be
working on issues reported there in the future, and will be working on
documentation there, etc.

IF you get a chance, try out the Codehaus plugin and let us know if it
meets your needs, or if it blows, and why. Report issues about it here
please:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MGWT/.

As for a mailing list, we plan to ask the Codehaus Mojo team to create
a list SPECIFIC to their GWT plugin, we have yet to find one thus far
(just links to the entire Mojo list, which is almost pointless). In
the meantime we will use this list.

[Mirko Nasato]

2009/4/3 Charlie Collins <charlie...@gmail.com>:

>
> This is the last big release of GWT-Maven, we hope. This release is
> intended to wrap up many of the patches we had in the issue tracker,
> and address other loose ends, with the goal of stabilizing and
> freezing this project. (There may be an RC2 if any issues crop up in
> RC1, but only if absolutely necessary.)
>

So no actual 2.0 FINAL release planned? Not that labels matter much in
practice, but in a sense it would be a shame to have 26 betas and 1 or
2 RCs and that's it.

It would be only fair I think for this project to tag a FINAL release
after say a couple of weeks with no major issues reported for RC1! :)

Cheers

Mirko

[Charlie Collins]

Yes, we could do that, makes sense. But it is as after all just the
label, so I am not sure I really care. Actually it's kind of annoying
when other people in the thread (not you, you contribute and make a
fair point), say "why is it beta, I have a production product and I
expect or require . . . " get over it - call it whatever you want,
rename it, whatever, it's the same CODE.)


On Apr 3, 6:10 am, Mirko Nasato <mirko.nas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/4/3 Charlie Collins <charlie.coll...@gmail.com>:

[Mirko Nasato]

I don't really care either, GMail is celebrating five years in beta
these days. But a Release Candidate usually means a candidate for the
final release, so I find it a bit strange that you're announcing RC as
"potential last release".

Or you could say that RC doesn't actually stand for Release Candidate
here, but for Robert and Charlie... :)

Cheers

Mirko


2009/4/3 Charlie Collins <charlie...@gmail.com>:

[Charlie Collins]

Right on with GMail, though I think it came out of "beta" earlier this
year - I used it for the first 4.75 as beta too. Many things are
"beta," it's used to indicate more than just how stable the software
is anymore. I went with "beta" for the level of commitment moreso than
how solid I felt it was (I think it's very solid, especially for basic
stuff, though users always seem to come up with some scenario I would
never try that reveals an issue every now and then). I have put a lot
more into this project than I intended at first, but it's not a team
of 10 people working things out, it's one guy in a van down by the
river - and several key people also helping out (but nobody really a
full timer, myself included) = hence my "beta" moniker.

I could do what Flickr did, and go with "gamma" next. (I have been
using flickr for years too.)

As for RC-1, Cooper (kebernet) picked that. It had a name before I got
to the source. But at this point it would make sense to have a final.
We will give this one a few weeks and see if there is anything to iron
out, and then throw down a 2.0 final.

On Apr 5, 9:16 am, Mirko Nasato <mirko.nas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't really care either, GMail is celebrating five years in beta
> these days. But a Release Candidate usually means a candidate for the
> final release, so I find it a bit strange that you're announcing RC as
> "potential last release".
>
> Or you could say that RC doesn't actually stand for Release Candidate
> here, but for Robert and Charlie... :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Mirko
>

> 2009/4/3 Charlie Collins <charlie.coll...@gmail.com>:

[Robert "kebernet" Cooper]

To be honest, I think releasing it as a 2.0 would be good because I still see comments from people using 1.8.X because the 2.0 line is marked beta. I know here at IHG, a lot of people are still using 25 or 26 on some projects. I think there are enough important fixes in the the new version that encouraging people to upgrade is a good idea.

--
:Robert "kebernet" Cooper
::kebe...@gmail.com
Alice's cleartext
Charlie is the attacker
Bob signs and encrypts
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9E8759F8

[Charlie Collins]

Ok, I think we should do the final release too. For the final though,
I thought we (read, you, you said you had it ;)) were going to also
switch the shell phases thing back, and make another goal for resource
filtering - sorry if that's vague but I don't recall all the details.
Is that still in the works? Once that is done, I think we should
release 2.0-RC2 and then after that is verified in the wild a bit a
2.0 final.

On Apr 6, 9:43 am, "Robert \"kebernet\" Cooper" <keber...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> To be honest, I think releasing it as a 2.0 would be good because I still
> see comments from people using 1.8.X because the 2.0 line is marked beta. I
> know here at IHG, a lot of people are still using 25 or 26 on some projects.
> I think there are enough important fixes in the the new version that
> encouraging people to upgrade is a good idea.
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Charlie Collins

> <charlie.coll...@gmail.com>wrote:

> ::keber...@gmail.com