“GWT no longer supports ChromeFrame. The implementation caused more bugs than it solved.”

[Thomas Broyer]

This is from the release notes: “GWT no longer supports ChromeFrame. The implementation caused more bugs than it solved.”

I suppose it's related to http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=6665 but then it's rather than GWT 2.5 now finally correctly supports ChromeFrame (even when disabled). Anyone has insights as to what this is really meaning? Is it more about “it might work, but we no longer guarantee it”? (but had it ever been the case?)

FYI, people took notice and some of them are already interpreting it wrong: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11467822/does-chrome-browser-support-gwt-2-5

[Manuel Carrasco Moñino]

As you say chromeframe works ok with 2.5.0, so I agree that the release note is incorrect and may confuse people.

The way to check that chromeframe is active is just to check whether the useragent contains the word 'safari' like we do with any other browser, and this only happens when the plugin is activated  [1].

I've checked 2.5.0-rc1 and it works as expected. I have used most recent and an old version (May-2011) of chromeframe with working applications and I've not seen any problem.

So in my opinion that release note should be removed or modified to say that 2.5 regression issues introduced in 2.4

- Manolo

[1] http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/chrome-frame-getting-started/understanding-chrome-frame-user-agent

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[Rajeev Dayal]

Hey guys,

This is my fault. I mis-interpreted the code change. As the change to "fix" this issue was basically a "revert" of the original commit that was supposed to add ChromeFrame support, I incorrectly assumed that reverting the code would prevent special behavior for ChromeFrame (which I figured we needed in order to make it work). Had I read issue #6665 more carefully, I would have realized that this fix was to improve support for ChromeFrame, not remove it entirely.

I'll be sure to fix this statement in the release notes.

However, what *is* our level of support for ChromeFrame? My thought is that we should guarantee support for it, just as we guarantee support for Chrome itself...that's probably a question for the steering committee, though..

Rajeev

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[Daniel Kurka]

I think we need to support Chrome Frame with GWT indeed. I know many enterprise apps that are built with GWT and use ChromeFrame in a no IE upgrade environment. 

-Daniel

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[Thomas Broyer]

On Thursday, July 19, 2012 12:16:26 AM UTC+2, rdayal wrote:

Hey guys,

This is my fault. I mis-interpreted the code change. As the change to "fix" this issue was basically a "revert" of the original commit that was supposed to add ChromeFrame support, I incorrectly assumed that reverting the code would prevent special behavior for ChromeFrame (which I figured we needed in order to make it work). Had I read issue #6665 more carefully, I would have realized that this fix was to improve support for ChromeFrame, not remove it entirely.

I'll be sure to fix this statement in the release notes.

3 months later, this is unfortunately still there :-(

Could anyone fix it please?

[Unnur Gretarsdottir]

OK - I'm just removing the bullet point entirely now - should be live soon

--
DO NOT FORWARD

[Rajeev Dayal]

Ugh, thanks Unnur.

Sorry about that, Thomas. 

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[Thomas Broyer]

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Rajeev Dayal <rda...@google.com> wrote:
> Ugh, thanks Unnur.
> Sorry about that, Thomas.

No problem Rajeev. Better late than never ;-)