Re: Update Gadgets to work with GWTSheel and the 1.6 release

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Eric Ayers

unread,
Feb 13, 2009, 5:45:02 AM2/13/09
to zun...@google.com, bo...@google.com, Scott Blum, GWTcontrib, gwt-google-apis
[crossposted to gwt-google-apis & google-web-toolkit-contrib]

Well, my patch blows up in trunk builds because About.VERSION_NUM is
set to 0.0.

Attached is a GWT patch that moves the
BrowserWidget.EXPECTED_GWT_ONLOAD_VERSION constant to
SelectionScriptLinker and performs a substitution. Also attached is a
gwt-google-apis patch so that the GadgetLinker will have a fallback
(for 1.6.0 and earlier versions) and just shove in "1.6" for now.

-Eric.

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:30 PM, <bo...@google.com> wrote:
> LGTM
>
>
> http://galgwt-reviews.appspot.com/3003/diff/1/2
> File gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/linker/GadgetLinker.java
> (right):
>
> http://galgwt-reviews.appspot.com/3003/diff/1/2#newcode127
> Line 127: String gwtVersions[] = About.GWT_VERSION_NUM.split("\\.");
> This is technically derived from
> BrowserWidget.EXPECTED_GWT_ONLOAD_VERSION, but that's a private field.
> My expectation is that this will evolve in a manner similar to
> About.java, but it may be worthwhile to add a patch to make the expected
> version public.
>
> http://galgwt-reviews.appspot.com/3003
>

--
Eric Z. Ayers - GWT Team - Atlanta, GA USA
http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/

gadget-linker-expected-version-r1248.patch
gwt-linker-expected-version-gwt-1.6-r4714.patch

Scott Blum

unread,
Feb 13, 2009, 10:20:22 AM2/13/09
to Eric Ayers, bo...@google.com, GWTcontrib, gwt-google-apis
These patches for 1.6 or trunk?  It seems like we want to do this in 1.6, right?

Eric Ayers

unread,
Feb 13, 2009, 10:57:51 AM2/13/09
to Scott Blum, bo...@google.com, GWTcontrib, gwt-google-apis
One of the is for GWT 1.6, the other is for gwt-google-apis

Scott Blum

unread,
Feb 13, 2009, 11:29:11 AM2/13/09
to Eric Ayers, bo...@google.com, GWTcontrib, gwt-google-apis
GWT part LGTM.

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 5:45 AM, Eric Ayers <zun...@google.com> wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages