Google Web Toolkit 2.0 RC1 Now Available

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Bruce Johnson

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 2:17:26 PM11/17/09
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi folks!

GWT 2.0 RC1 is now ready for you to try. The full documentation is still very much a work in progress, but you can at least start trying out the GWT SDK distribution and the Google Plugin for Eclipse using the following instructions:


GWT 2.0 is going to be a big release, so don't be surprised if there are a few bumps and surprises as we continue to finalize everything. Similarly, we would caution you against using GWT 2.0 RC1 in production. 

We are eager to get your feedback, both good and bad, in the Google Web Toolkit Developer Forum:


If you find specific bugs to report, please do so at the GWT Issue Tracker:


See you online. Happy coding :-)

-- Bruce, on behalf of the GWT team

Yozons Support on Gmail

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 2:23:12 PM11/17/09
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
What's the ETA now for GWT 2.0 final?  I am developing now under 1.7.1, but won't expect to be in production for another 4 months or so.  Would I be better off getting a jump on 2.0 now or would I risk 2.0 not being ready for production over the next several months?

br...@google.com

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 2:32:00 PM11/17/09
to Google Web Toolkit
You should be in good shape either way, actually. The same project
structure will work with either SDK version, so you can retain the
option to switch back and forth. The only "one-way" choice would be if
you start using the new UiBinder, ClientBundle, and layout panel
stuff. If you need to play it conservatively, you could hold off on
those things, but you can at least start using the new in-browser
development mode, which should make you even more productive as you
push toward your own launch.

Big picture, though, we're eager to finalize 2.0, so I wouldn't expect
too long an RC cycle this time. In other words, you should even be
safe to start using 2.0-only features in the timeframe you're
describing.

Arthur Kalmenson

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 2:58:05 PM11/17/09
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Congrats on the release! We'll definitely be using GWT 2 in our next
project, I can't wait!

But I guess deRPC didn't make it in? Any chance of it appearing before
the final release?

--
Arthur Kalmenson
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To post to this group, send email to google-we...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=.
>
>
>

Chris Ramsdale

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 3:33:53 PM11/17/09
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
The deRPC components live under the com.google.gwt.rpc package and are available in the RC. The doc may be a bit sparse or missing in a few spots but we're adding content daily as we march towards release. 

Matt Raible

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 4:46:44 PM11/17/09
to Google Web Toolkit
Is anyone working on getting this uploaded to Maven's Central
repository?

Thanks,

Matt

bkbonner

unread,
Nov 17, 2009, 10:03:37 PM11/17/09
to Google Web Toolkit
Yes, can somebody please upload it to Maven Repo, or oss.sonatype.org.

Brian

Arthur Kalmenson

unread,
Nov 18, 2009, 11:01:00 AM11/18/09
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Oh, good to hear. There was some discussion about whether deRPC would
make it into 2.0 or not, and I didn't see it mentioned in the Wiki.
Sorry about that!

--
Arthur Kalmenson

Tristan

unread,
Nov 20, 2009, 6:07:35 PM11/20/09
to Google Web Toolkit
What do I pass to the -server argument when I want gwt 2.0 to run with
all the neat GAE stuff (the google eclipse plugin does it
automatically in 1.7)

On Nov 18, 10:01 am, Arthur Kalmenson <arthur.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, good to hear. There was some discussion about whether deRPC would
> make it into 2.0 or not, and I didn't see it mentioned in the Wiki.
> Sorry about that!
>
> --
> Arthur Kalmenson
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Chris Ramsdale <cramsd...@google.com> wrote:
> > The deRPC components live under the com.google.gwt.rpc package and are
> > available in the RC. The doc may be a bit sparse or missing in a few spots
> > but we're adding content daily as we march towards release.
>
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Arthur Kalmenson <arthur.k...@gmail.com>

Tristan

unread,
Nov 21, 2009, 12:22:45 PM11/21/09
to Google Web Toolkit
To answer my own question:

-server com.google.appengine.tools.development.gwt.AppEngineLauncher

amjedonline

unread,
Nov 22, 2009, 10:03:23 AM11/22/09
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi Bruce,
When can we expect the release ( roughly )?
So that we could decide whether to start working on 2.0 or not ??

-Amjed

Yozons Support on Gmail

unread,
Nov 22, 2009, 1:03:32 PM11/22/09
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
This has been asked many times already.  The general answer seems to be that they are eager to get it out, but that there's no formal date yet.  If you are just getting started, 2.0 may be the place to start, though there is less documentation available, especially for the new capabilities.  They assure that 1.7 code will run on 2.0, so you are not hurt by using their current release either.

grandfatha

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 4:02:44 AM11/25/09
to Google Web Toolkit
After compiling a trivial sample app with the new GWT 2.0RC1 I can see
a lot of functions with empty bodies in my compiled output.

It looks like the following:


function nh(){}
function $h(){}
function Zh(){}
function oi(){}
function wi(){}
function Fi(){}
function Ni(){}
function Vi(){}
function cj(){}
function mj(){}
function uj(){}
function Cj(){}
function Gj(){}
function Kj(){}


After that there is stuff like this:


function ZCb(){}
function mt(a){}
function Ot(a){}
function Pt(a){}
function Ut(a){}
function Zv(a){}
function RA(a){}
function SA(a){}
function TA(a){}
function UA(a){}
function VA(a){}
function WA(a){}
function XA(a){}
function dD(a){}
function eD(a){}


When GWT is all about reducing the compiled output and the initial
download and that stuff, why do those empty functions make sense?
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages