now.. afetr GWT 2.0?

[tfreitas]

What about roadmap?

[Bruce Johnson]

Working on a draft one.

What do folks here think is important?

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:42 AM, tfreitas <tfre...@gmail.com> wrote:

What about roadmap?

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

[Sami Jaber]

Hey Bruce,

GWT 2 has provided great features focusing on the hidden parts of the iceberg (devmode, codesplitting, clientbundle, ...). It would be great to focus 2.1 on the user experience and the visible part of the user framework. 

  

Here's my wish list :

0) More widgets/containers compliant with the new CSS Layout API to get rid of the RootPanel.get()  

1) Enrich the existing widgets and provide a good user experience (not the 3 predefined awful themes ;-)). Copy/Paste Wave/adWords apps themes is a good starting point :-D. With a multiple windows management framework (docking, maximize, etc ...) 

2) A real DataGrid (sorting, paging, filtering, async...). Maybe by Improving the design (and the look) of the current incubator ScrollTable 

3) DataBinding & Validation (btw see this post from Ray announcing something for Q1 2009 ;-) -> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/thread/8c611ab8bb076ead?pli=1 

4) Replace RemoteService and RemoteServiceServlet by deRPC "for real"

5) Provide a UiBinder WYSIWYG Eclipse plugin (this would be the killer app)

6) provide a framework for UiBinder custom parsers   

---- long term -----

7) Rewrite entirely the compiler ;-) instant dev mode (to benefit from incremental compilation) and generate the permutations from .class, not source code (to facilitate other language integration)

I didn't congratulate all the GWT team for this fantastic 2.0 release. Let me thank you once more (some of you deserve a vacation ;-)).

Sami    

   

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

[Matt Mastracci]

GWT 2.0 was so awesome, it'll be hard to top any of the new stuff with my feature wishlist. 

A few things I'd like:

 - moving as many compiler properties as possible into configuration properties so we can build an instrumented release (with type cast checking, assertions, emulated stack traces) at the same time as release that can be turned on via 

 - A DOM object to represent the window

 - Less of a hit on first load in development mode

 - New linker that uses iframes with dynamic scripts and a more generic, more easily reusable hosted mode script

 

Matt.

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

[Thomas Broyer]

On 16 déc, 18:01, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?

- remove listeners (wasn't this targeted to 2.0 ?)
- "port" all widgets to c.g.g.dom.client.Element and deprecate both
c.g.g.user.client.Element and c.g.g.user.client.DOM (eventually
enhancing c.g.g.d.c.Element with, e.g. insertChild(Element,int))
- further optimize code, both what the compiler produces (I'm told
this is being worked on while we talk) and the client code (widgets
and JRE)

[David Clément]

> 3) DataBinding & Validation (btw see this post from Ray announcing something
> for Q1 2009 ;-)

For me, it's the main feature GWT should have.
Next would be "pretty" widgets, Drag'n Drop (in the framework, GWT DnD
is very good, but DnD deserve to be in the framework by itself).
And on top of it, yes, the WYSIWYG Eclipse plugin (with databing and
validation, it could make people more easily start with GWT!)

Thank you for the usefull features of 2.0 (just devMode in Firefox is worth it)!

[Brad Leupen]

1) Improve change-compile-refresh development experience. This, IMO,
is GWT's one and only pain point and its a big one. DevMode refresh,
while much improved, still is like watching paint dry compared to
other web development platforms. Something like an incremental, non-
optimized web mode compile, synced with eclipse compiles, would be
friggin amazing.

Distant 2nd) Formalize data binding

Brad

[Thomas Broyer]

Hmm, I'd add (with high priority) further rework and improvements of
events:
- to make it easier/possible to add support for other DOM events in
third-party libs (see issue 2562, focusIn/focusOut would be cool too,
see issue 1431), by moving the sinking into the DomEvent itself (at
least decoupling it from the bit-mask used in Widget::sinkEvents)
- to finally have a *good* handling of keyboard/text input events
(already improved in 1.6, many nits left, see suggestions given on the
issue tracker)
- to eventually allow adding handlers in "capture" mode (you know,
the last parameter in W3C DOM's addEventListener)

[Isaac Truett]

I'd like to see SuggestBox get a little love. For example:

http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2311
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2739
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3409

And one of those issues links to this thread where I had some other
thoughts on SuggestBox improvements:

http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/thread/83db777f0e0602d0

And if I could include a wish for future GPE development it would be
wizards, automated refactorings, and reusable code templates. Things
like:

http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3914

I already have at least one SuggestBox patch floating around out
there. I'd be happy to update that and work on other SuggestBox
features, too, in my "spare" time. If somebody with commit privs cares
to buddy up for design and review, please feel free to contact me on
or off list. :)

Oh, and woohoo GWT 2.0! Go team!

- Isaac

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

[Matteo]

+1 DataBinding & Validation

Matteo

On 17 dic, 02:47, Isaac Truett <itru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to see SuggestBox get a little love. For example:
>

> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2311http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2739http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3409

>
> And one of those issues links to this thread where I had some other
> thoughts on SuggestBox improvements:
>

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

>
> And if I could include a wish for future GPE development it would be
> wizards, automated refactorings, and reusable code templates. Things
> like:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3914
>
> I already have at least one SuggestBox patch floating around out
> there. I'd be happy to update that and work on other SuggestBox
> features, too, in my "spare" time. If somebody with commit privs cares
> to buddy up for design and review, please feel free to contact me on
> or off list. :)
>
> Oh, and woohoo GWT 2.0! Go team!
>
> - Isaac
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> > Working on a draft one.
> > What do folks here think is important?
>

[Miguel Ping]

+1 for Databinding & Validation
+1 for a nice DataGrid
+1 for nicer widgets

On Dec 17, 10:09 am, Matteo <matteo.fiande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 DataBinding & Validation
>
> Matteo
>
> On 17 dic, 02:47, Isaac Truett <itru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'd like to see SuggestBox get a little love. For example:
>

> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2311http...

[DanielK]

Version 2.0 tackled nearly all problems I had with GWT. Here is the
rest that keeps me from being fully productive with it:

- bidirectional UIBinder with mini expression language to completely
remove programmatic UI, e.g.:

MyWidget.java:

class MyWidget extends DataboundComposite{

public Property<List<String>> customers = ...;

MyWidget(List<String> customers){
// uses some inherited method to init the property
this.customers = setProperty(customers);
// a DataBoundComposite parses not only the ui.xml file
// but also fills it with initialized properties
initWidget(Uibinderstuff...);
}
}

MyWidget.ui.xml:

<ui:UiBinder xmlns:ui="urn:ui:com.google.gwt.uibinder"
xmlns:g="urn:import:com.google.gwt.user.client.ui">
<g:HTMLPanel>
<ul>
<g:each property="customers" var="customer">
<li>{customer}</li>
</g:each>
</ul>
</g:HTMLPanel>
</ui:UiBinder>

this would make working with FlexTable a lot more declarative when
displaying a custom tabular data widget that does not fit into the
default "DataGrid"-thinking.

- complement the big picture with an app framework built around Ray
Ryan's architecture-talk (no one should have to reinvent a
PlaceManager like I did after moving to 2.0 ;) )

[Nathan Wells]

+1 to widget improvements
+1 to removing listeners - though this is a breaking change on a minor
release?
+1 to bug fixes - all bugs, especially the ones I've starred :)
+1 to data binding + validation

[Arthur Kalmenson]

> Working on a draft one.
> What do folks here think is important?

- data binding and validation frameworks, which would remove a _lot_
of boiler plate code and greatly increase productivity.
- incubator clean up and perhaps splitting it into multiple projects?

GWT 2.0 release is awesome, thanks for all the great work!

--
Arthur Kalmenson

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:

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

[jopaki]

Ability to "wire" a set of related many entities in the data binding
declaration.

For example, an Account entity. An Account has a set of related many
AccountAddress entities.

The data-binding framework should be able to "map" these
AccountAddress entities to a set of nested form control "groups"
represented in say a TabbedWidget.
Moreover, the ability to add/remove such "child" entities is assumed.

This is a common use-case that deserves first class support as opposed
to only providing a "monolithic" mapping strategy.

I think a good data-binding modeling strategy is in the gwittr
framework: http://code.google.com/p/gwittir/wiki/Binding

my 2 cents, Jon

[Bart Guijt]

1) Databinding a la Adobe Flex (they have *by far* the best solution[1] I've seen in all these toolkits). The GWT1.6 'HasValue' interface is a good starting point for this, hopefully it mixes well with UiBinder.
2) Scala compiler!
3) Make Compiler commandline options available to the Linker/Generator components. In my linker I'd like to know where the source webapp folder is, for instance.

Having said that, GWT2.0 is an excellent piece of software with which I'm able to create excellent (mobile) web solutions. Thanks team!

Cheers,

Bart Guijt
E: bgu...@gmail.com
T: +31 6 30408987

[tciaccio]

+1 nice datagrid
+1 remove deprecated listeners

[Xavier M.]

Here are the enhancements I would like to have in GWT :

* incremental compilation to have the same ease of use than with php or jsp ; we have for instance an internal application where we have merged php and gwt, and (from the ease of modification point of view) it is always simpler to make a change or a patch on the php code than the gwt one. Incemental compilation should render these task simpler

* compilation starting from .class and not from  .java ; we could use gwt with code written in scala, groovy or better javafx

* include the javafx syntax in gwt for describing UI instead of UIBinder (I hate xml for doing UI) ; we could even use the "bind" javafx feature in gwt, which could improve greatly the way of writing applications

* refactoring theme management ; it fits not well with css way of doing things ; it is to complicated and not flexible enough

* include html5 websockets

* "desktop mode gwt" like AIR ou Silverlight

* notion of timeline and states like in javafx or flash

* eclipse/netbeans ui composer plugin

* mobile and desktop  profiles

* launch the browser and set the url in it when running an application in development mode

* OSGI-like mode to perfomr modularity and enabling to load only some features for a specific user

* ...

 

regards

Xavier

[FDG]

- remove actual UiBinder limitations
- supports printing using css media (so wrap themes around a @media
screen)

[TiMeZoNe]

hi,

here is my wishlist:

+1 UiBinder WYSIWYG Eclipse plugin
+1 DataBinding & Validation
+1 DataGrid
+1 multiple window management framework
(forground/background like gwt-mosaic windowpanel (zIndex based),
docking, maximize, etc ...)

time

[xavier...@gmail.com]

regards
Xavier

On 16 déc, 19:49, Matt Mastracci <matt...@mastracci.com> wrote:
> GWT 2.0 was so awesome, it'll be hard to top any of the new stuff with my feature wishlist.
>
> A few things I'd like:
>
>  - moving as many compiler properties as possible into configuration properties so we can build an instrumented release (with type cast checking, assertions, emulated stack traces) at the same time as release that can be turned on via
>  - A DOM object to represent the window
>  - Less of a hit on first load in development mode
>  - New linker that uses iframes with dynamic scripts and a more generic, more easily reusable hosted mode script
>
> Matt.
>
> On 2009-12-16, at 10:01 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
> > Working on a draft one.
>
> > What do folks here think is important?
>

[monkeyboy]

-A nice DataGrid (maybe an improvement of the one in the incubator
which works nice).
-Improve change-compile-refresh development experience (like Brad
Leupen said)
-Support (plugin) for an IDE other than eclipse (Netbeans, Idea) would
be nice.

GWT 2.0 rocks. Keep up the good work.

[Maciej Trela]

+1 for Databinding & Validation

+1 for real DataGrid (sorting, paging, filtering, async...)
+1 for nicer widgets

[Wadael]

Hello,

I'll make a single wish : definitely an enterprise-level datagrid
(sorting, paging, filtering and so on).

Congrats and Thanks

Jérôme

[Rudy Krol]

My letter to Santa Claus ;)
1. A real DataGrid (maybe integrate ScrollTable from gwt-incubator)
2. DataBinding & Validation
3. UiBinder Eclipse plugin
4. Integrate more widgets from gwt-incubator (Spinner, Sliderbar,
Glasspanel, CollapsiblePanel, Canvas, etc.) and others (gwt-dnd)
5. Improve animation effects (fade, slide, etc.)
6. Provide a MVP framework

Rudy

On Dec 17, 11:09 am, Matteo <matteo.fiande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 DataBinding & Validation
>
> Matteo
>
> On 17 dic, 02:47, Isaac Truett <itru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'd like to see SuggestBox get a little love. For example:
>

> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2311http...

[johann]

Would love to see out of the box distributed compilation. We're
supporting 8 languages which bumped our compilation time to more than
45 min for the whole project...

On Dec 16, 9:01 am, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:

[Oppertunity]

i think GWT must provide css api for generate the css from java code
because java code is more manageable than css (usage tracking or
refactoring)

in my idea, GWT generate css on compile, not set on runtime.

[Edwin Nathaniel]

I would love to see things to stabilize more than adding new features.

1) Improving the overall development experience.
- Faster compiler
- Faster DevMode

2) Improving tutorials and documentations, perhaps come up with a bit
of best practices.
- More articles about testing, how to automate tests
- A cookbook website

3) More tooling supports
- Instrumentation API?
- Logger/logging
- NetBeans plugins

Data Binder and Validation are nice to have but not important. Some
people choose to make the widget as dumb as possible: no binder, no
validation. All validations happened in either Presenter or Model
Presenter if you're using MVP.

Ed

[jscheller]

My wish list: More focus on making it easier to build powerful and
more elegant interfaces quickly...

1. Visually improved/Less Complex DataGrid (PagingScrollTable)
2. Improved support for animations
3. More/Improved Widgets (integrated from Incubator or elsewhere)

The grid issue is huge, and is getting a lot of feedback here. Key
parts of so many applications are based around some sort of data-
connected grid, and Incubator's PagingScrollTable is something of a
beast to get working exactly the way you want.

[tamsler]

+1 DataGrid

On Dec 16, 12:01 pm, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?
>
>
>

[Benju]

GWT is already really really fast for end users but speed of
development could use some work. I don't know how but speed of
development needs to be improved, specifically dev mode times.

[Chi H]

- Another vote for data binding + validation
- Rich datagrid component, similar to the PagingScrollTable in the
incubator
- Inbuilt support for server push (comet)
- We should be able to exclude methods from GWT compilation using an
annotation (e.g.: @GwtIncompatible). This would make it easier to
share classes between the server side and the client side. Right now,
if we want to add a method that uses classes which are not GWT-
compatible, it has to be put into a separate class, even if the method
is only ever called by server side code.
- Get an early start on Java 7 support (i know it is a moving target,
especially the closures part, but there was a long wait for Java 5
support in GWT 1.5, and it would be nice if there was a much shorter
wait for Java 7 support)

[Konstantin.Scheglov]

>
> What do folks here think is important?

+1 for faster DevMode startup.
I don't understand why it recompiles all Java classes again and
again, when Eclipse already has classes in "output" folder.
Plus performing JSNI code parsing and applying ASM converters....
Would be great to cache all these things on disk and start... hm...
10 times faster. ;-)

[Arthur Kalmenson]

A lot of people are asking for a faster DevMode, is that because you
are closing DevMode after every change? You don't have to do that, you
can leave DevMode running for the entire day and just refresh the
browser itself (while coding in whichever IDE you wish, as long as
it's compiling the classes into the correct directory). If you make
server side changes, you can just click the "Restart Server" button
under the Jetty tab.

Furthermore, GWT 2.0 adds the "-draftCompile" flag which, according to
the GWT Blog http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/2009/12/introducing-google-web-toolkit-20-now.html

"If you do need to compile to JavaScript often — though hopefully
development mode will dramatically reduce your need to do so — you can
use the GWT compiler's new -draftCompile flag, which speeds up
compiles by skipping optimizations. To be clear, you definitely
shouldn't deploy JavaScript compiled that way, but it can be a time
saver during non-production continuous builds."

-draftCompile in addition to restrictions to the user agent you
compile to (if you can afford to do that during development), should
make your compiles a lot faster.

Hope that helps!

All the best,
--
Arthur Kalmenson

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

[John Huss]

+1 Databinding

[Eugen Paraschiv]

- Junit 4 support would be one great addition, as writing JUnit 3
tests is really a pain
- the fake DOM structures that one of the GWT talks at Google IO talks
about would be great as well (for the purposes of testing)
- removing all the deprecated classes from the trunk (DevMode still
warns about lots of them, and my understanding was that all of the
deprecated classes would be removed in the 2.0 release)
- one more thing (and this is a big one): make the compile process
parallel; I'm not sure if this is at all possible, but I cannot think
why not, at least to a certain degree. It seems that each new GWT
release is adding more compiler optimizations, which is great, but all
of these build up and the compile time increases. Making this parallel
would probably be the single best improvement of GWT.
- that's it for now, I'm sure the addition of closures to Java 7 makes
possible a host of other compiler optimizations and changes for the
better, so that will be great to see happening (when using Java 7 of
course)
Thanks for the great work on the 2.0 release.

[Johan Rydberg]

On Dec 17, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Arthur Kalmenson wrote:

>> Working on a draft one.
>> What do folks here think is important?
>

> - data binding and validation frameworks, which would remove a _lot_
> of boiler plate code and greatly increase productivity.

Absolutely!

> - incubator clean up and perhaps splitting it into multiple projects?

Yes,

It would be nice to clean up the scrolltable and put it in a separate
project.

> GWT 2.0 release is awesome, thanks for all the great work!

I agree. Thank you!

[Johan Rydberg]

On Dec 17, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Arthur Kalmenson wrote:

Working on a draft one.

What do folks here think is important?

- data binding and validation frameworks, which would remove a _lot_
of boiler plate code and greatly increase productivity.
- incubator clean up and perhaps splitting it into multiple projects?

Also, take a look at http://code.google.com/p/gwt-pectin/ that is a

data binding and validation framework that uses HasValue<T> as basis.

It would also be neat with a "Enablable" interface to slap on everything

that has setEnabled.

GWT 2.0 release is awesome, thanks for all the great work!

--
Arthur Kalmenson



On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:

Working on a draft one.

What do folks here think is important?

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:42 AM, tfreitas <tfre...@gmail.com> wrote:

What about roadmap?

--

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

--

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

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

[Brad Leupen]

Arthur,

No, we are not closing DevMode. Our client app is not small.
Refreshing DevMode in 2.0 takes 20-30 seconds on a decent multi-core
workstation. Often, we are only able to refresh a handful of times
before we start running into out-of-memory exceptions and browser
crashes (FF 3.5.6). I don't want to sound unappreciative - DevMode in
2.0 is MUCH MUCH faster than before. We are very excited about this.
However, I rarely need to use the debugger in the actual client. Most
of the time I just want to refresh the layout or test the usability of
a widget. For this, DevMode is overkill and, in fact, useless for
testing real world UI latency.

Draft Compile is a wonderful idea but even it takes over a minute to
compile a single permutation of our app.

At the end of the day, all i want to do is make a small change to a
widget and refresh my browser to test the layout, look and feel, and
usability. over and over and over. Sometimes i might need to debug my
ui logic but not most of the time.

Brad

[Xavier M.]

same problems unfortunately

2009/12/18 Brad Leupen <qcom...@gmail.com>

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

[Scott Blum]

Thanks for the feedback Brad.  We've talked internally about an idea for "instant compile" where the workflow would be essentially like hosted mode, except it would very quickly translate your code into JavaScript with zero optimizations.  It sounds like there might be some interest in this.

(Of course, we also want to make hosted mode much faster than it is even in 2.0!)

--

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

[Brad Leupen]

Scott,

That sounds great! It's reassuring to know y'all are thinking about
this. I know it's not an easy problem to solve.

Brad

[Xavier M.]

shortly, you intend to make a kind of incremental compilationnot of course in .class but .js. It seems good to me.

2009/12/18 Brad Leupen <qcom...@gmail.com>

Brad

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

[Michele Spighi]

- Wrap Google Closure Library (http://code.google.com/closure/
library/)

On 16 Dic, 18:01, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?
>

[Arthur Kalmenson]

Hey Brad,

Sorry about that, I've just seen a number of people in the IRC channel
asking about why DevMode was so slow and it turned out they had been
closing it after each check. I just wanted to throw that comment up
there for those that didn't know. I guess our apps haven't got to that
size yet....

All the best,
--
Arthur Kalmenson

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

[Chris]

I would encourage any effort to get an "instant compile" feature in
dev mode. When designing the GUI and tweaking a widget here or there
or css, a quick turn around would be a huge win. Right now, tweaking
the GUI is a cumbersome process.

Chris....

On Dec 18, 10:16 am, Scott Blum <sco...@google.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback Brad.  We've talked internally about an idea for
> "instant compile" where the workflow would be essentially like hosted mode,
> except it would very quickly translate your code into JavaScript with zero
> optimizations.  It sounds like there might be some interest in this.
>
> (Of course, we also want to make hosted mode much faster than it is even in
> 2.0!)
>

[Isaac Truett]

Has everyone responding in this thread been checking the issue
tracker, staring issues they want to see resolved, and entering new
issues where they don't yet exist in the tracker? I know several of
the requests mentioned in this thread are already in there.

http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/list

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

[Brad Leupen]

Arthur,

It's a good tip, especially when hot swap tells you that you need to
restart. For our app, we resorted to creating sandbox GWT entry points
to develop widgets in isolation. This gave us usable compile/refresh
times but I still long for the days when I could just press F5 to
refresh the whole thing. :)

Another wish list item: a less API-invasive approach to protecting
against XSRF attacks (see: http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/web/security-for-gwt-applications).

It seems to me that XSRF checks could be baked into the RPC plumbing,
perhaps triggered by annotations on the RPC service interface.

Brad

[John Tamplin]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Brad Leupen <qcom...@gmail.com> wrote:

Another wish list item: a less API-invasive approach to protecting
against XSRF attacks (see: http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/web/security-for-gwt-applications).

It seems to me that XSRF checks could be baked into the RPC plumbing,
perhaps triggered by annotations on the RPC service interface.

The plan for this is at http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/RpcAuth though I have no timetable for when it will get implemented. 

--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google

[Olivier Gérardin]

Hi all,

I wish the GWT team would focus on all the things that force us to use
such awful third-party libraries as Ext-GWT:
-more appealing built-in themes
-richer components, like data grids with remote pagination
-data binding

Ext-GWT is full of annoyances but it has good looking widgets, easy-to-
use grids (after you have fixed the quirks) and kind-of-working data
binding. I would drop it in a blink if GWT offered those features.

Of course I wouldn't mind if the compiler was faster, but so far we
can manage with dev mode and the occasional GWT compilation.

Olivier

[Mauro]

Definitely, the most important thing for me is fix the bugs and above
all publish an excellent documentation and ...

+1 for Databinding & Validation
+1 for a nice DataGrid
+1 for nicer widgets

Great job on GWT 2.0

[Miroslav Pokorny]

I would like more control over which classes/packages were actually
sucked into a module for compilation. I appreciate there are
workarounds like sticking diff java files under diff src dirs but
that's ugly.

I don't like how including a particular package also sucks in sub
packages. I think it wouldbe better if it only did the specific pkg.

Further ctrl over individually classes within an included pkg would be
great.

I have noticed rhat google collections marks a few classes with
various annonations like gwt-compatible and gwt-not-compatible. It
would be great if the compiler honoured these.

Even finer grained ctrl over individual methods would be great.i f it
worked like suppress warnings but instructed the compiler to ignore
invompatible code that would be great.
- Use cases include stuff like a class with lots of static helpers
some intended just for the server others that also are useful under gwt.
- sometimes it's usegful to overload a method to take types that are
irrelevant or wrong in gwt - eg inputstream. Again one could take that
helper and stick it somewhere else buts it's ugly to have the
disconnect when they really belong together.

Hyh

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

[federico]

- runtime modularity to avoid monolitic compilations

On 16 Dic, 18:01, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?
>
>
>

[federico]

- clean EventBus implementation with transparents server-push events

[Miroslav Pokorny]

like ?

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

--
mP

[Andrés Testi]

+1 for databinding
+1 for better grids
+1 for enterprise examples, (CRUD applications)

Why not isolate the event framework to use it in non GWT projects?

- Andrés

[Ray Cromwell]

See http://www.jboss.org/errai

it has a heterogenous EventBus implementation (client GWT or Server),
uses Comet when available, etc

-Ray

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

[Xavier Mehaut]

Websockets

Envoyé de mon iPhone

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

[Tom]

There's Eclipse Databinding available for GWT which provides the
Databinding + Validation infrastructure.

Ad 2)
See http://tomsondev.bestsolution.at/2009/06/27/eclipse-databinding-3-5-for-gwt/
for an example implementation but please
note that the foundation is completely agnostic of the domain and UI-
Technology you are using
(there are e.g. Databinding implementation for SWT, Qt, Swing, GWT on
the UI-side and JavaBeans, POJOs and EMF-Objects available).

The sources are available under EPL.

Ad 6)
I'm working on an MVP projects named UFaceKit which builds upon the
foundation I described above. The project us developed at Eclipse.org
and there's some information available at http://wiki.eclipse.org/UFaceKit
and I plan to work on it now that I've finished my work on QxWT
(http://tomsondev.bestsolution.at/2009/12/17/qxwt-1-0-0-0-released/)
which is going to build the foundation for one possible UFaceKit-
Implementation for GWT.

If people or the GWT team are interested on the it don't hestitate to
contact me at tom dot schindl (at) bestsolution dot at

Tom

On 17 Dez., 12:07, Rudy Krol <rudy.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My letter to Santa Claus ;)
> 1. A real DataGrid (maybe integrate ScrollTable from gwt-incubator)
> 2. DataBinding & Validation
> 3. UiBinder Eclipse plugin
> 4. Integrate more widgets from gwt-incubator (Spinner, Sliderbar,
> Glasspanel, CollapsiblePanel, Canvas, etc.) and others (gwt-dnd)
> 5. Improve animation effects (fade, slide, etc.)
> 6. Provide a MVP framework
>
> Rudy
>
> On Dec 17, 11:09 am, Matteo <matteo.fiande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 DataBinding & Validation
>
> > Matteo
>
> > On 17 dic, 02:47, Isaac Truett <itru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I'd like to see SuggestBox get a little love. For example:
>
> > >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2311http...
>
> > > And one of those issues links to this thread where I had some other
> > > thoughts on SuggestBox improvements:
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse...
>
> > > And if I could include a wish for future GPE development it would be
> > > wizards, automated refactorings, and reusable code templates. Things
> > > like:
>
> > >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3914
>
> > > I already have at least one SuggestBox patch floating around out
> > > there. I'd be happy to update that and work on other SuggestBox
> > > features, too, in my "spare" time. If somebody with commit privs cares
> > > to buddy up for design and review, please feel free to contact me on
> > > or off list. :)
>
> > > Oh, and woohoo GWT 2.0! Go team!
>
> > > - Isaac

[sebv]

Hello,
In my opinion GWT 2.1 should provide the following features (order by
priority):
- WYSIWYG edit of uibinder with GWT eclipse plugin
- Beans Binding (JSR 295) implementation
- Beans Validation (JSR 303) implementation
- Helpers to ensure cross browser css compatibility
- Servlet remote service dispatcher for less xml configuration
- Optional MVP with inject (with GIN ?), service place implementation
and event bus
- Optional authentication mecanism
- Scaffolding for generate forms
- HTML 5 capabilities already implemented in modern browsers

I thank the whole team for their excellent work.
I have no doubt that the next version of GWT will be as good as the
previous version.

Sebastian

[Miroslav Pokorny]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:08 AM, sebv <seb.v...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,
In my opinion GWT 2.1 should provide the following features (order by
priority):
- WYSIWYG edit of uibinder with GWT eclipse plugin
- Beans Binding (JSR 295) implementation
- Beans Validation (JSR 303) implementation
- Helpers to ensure cross browser css compatibility
- Servlet remote service dispatcher for less xml configuration
- Optional MVP with inject (with GIN ?), service place implementation
and event bus

Do you mean an event bus that uses server push (comet)? I suppose official comet support first would be great.
 

- Optional authentication mecanism

Why, GWT is a framework for writing web apps with most of its utility living inside the browser.
Any authentication portion of a GWT app amounts to pretty much a login box which then asks a server component to validate and so on, so what exactly is GWT going to bring besides a widget. Whats the point of duplicating all the server libraries for validation.

I notice that you did not mention authorization which is a much more complex topic and there are many options on how to achieve this.
 

- Scaffolding for generate forms

In addition to UIBinder, or do you mean some nice layouts for programmatically creating forms without any ui binder stuff ?
 

- HTML 5 capabilities already implemented in modern browsers

Like Video tag ? What happens if one is in a non html5 browser how should gwt fallback gracefully ie what should the video tag do ?
 

I thank the whole team for their excellent work.
I have no doubt that the next version of GWT will be as good as the
previous version.

Sebastian

On 16 déc, 18:01, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?
>
>
>

> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:42 AM, tfreitas <tfrei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What about roadmap?
>
> > --
> >http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

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

--
mP

[Lypheus]

+1 JavaFX/Code GUI Streamlining instead of UIBinder

Some mechanism to allow for "publishing" client/js friendly variants
of server side objects to clean up need for DTO's.

[Célio]

+1 server push (cometd)
+1 dependency injection (gin?)

[Jon]

+1 for Databinding & Validation - this is now the number one missing
feature in GWT now that we have declarative markup via UiBinder

Also client side serialisation of beans to JSON or the RPC format
would be nice - for use with HTML5 local storage

Any news on the roadmap?

On Dec 17 2009, 4:01 am, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Working on a draft one.
>
> What do folks here think is important?
>
>
>

> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:42 AM, tfreitas <tfrei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What about roadmap?
>

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

[Xavier Mehaut]

+1 websockets
+1 javafx declarative syntax

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

[Allahbaksh Asadullah]

+1 websocket

+1 protocol buffer

Allahbaksh

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

[Miroslav Pokorny]

What has protocol buffers got to do with gwt ? There's nothing stopping one from using it on the server ? What utility does it add to the clientside ? Where exactly does it fit in the grand ecoscape ?

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

[Allahbaksh Asadullah]

I mean to say, gwt port for protocol buffer. It is used in google wave. 

http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2008/07/protocol-buffers-googles-data.html

Regards,

Allahbaksh

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

[nicolas.deloof]

+1 for DataBinding. JSR 295 support would be great, like
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-beans-binding/ does
+1 for JSR303 (validation), there is allready a proof of concept
available at http://code.google.com/p/gwt-validation/

> > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > Working on a draft one.
> > > > What do folks here think is important?
>

[Martin]

+1 for OSGi support

[skrat]

Allow UiBinder to use any ClientBundle in embedded <ui:style> CSS, so
I can reuse my images actually, can't believe it's not working.

On Dec 17 2009, 3:25 pm, FDG <fdigiuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - remove actual UiBinder limitations
> - supports printing using css media (so wrap themes around a @media
> screen)

[Ray Ryan]

That should work already. Are you using @UiField(provided - true)?  Please file an issue with details.

rjrjr

On Feb 15, 2010 3:36 AM, "skrat" <dusan.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

Allow UiBinder to use any ClientBundle in embedded <ui:style> CSS, so
I can reuse my images actually, can't believe it's not working.

On Dec 17 2009, 3:25 pm, FDG <fdigiuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - remove actual UiBinder limitations

...