1. #1
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    46
    Vote Rating
    0
    Konstantin.Scheglov is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Question Who is developing GXT 3.0 now?

    Who is developing GXT 3.0 now?


    In the past I've had great experience with GXT 2.x during GWT Designer development.
    Almost everything worked exactly as I expected.
    It was such pleasure to work on so polished library.

    I've hoped to see same for GXT 3.0, but unfortunately right now it does not meet my team expectations.
    I like new approach, but too many things don't work or have surprises.
    I don't get reply for most of my bug reports.

    So, I'd like to ask who is actually developing GXT 3.0 now?
    Same team who did this for GXT 2.x or not?
    Is GXT 3.0 just low priority fun project or really the next version of GXT?
    Konstantin Scheglov

  2. #2
    Sencha User rohdef's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    67
    Vote Rating
    3
    rohdef is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    I don't know the answer to that, but on a side note. Things that don't work is to be expected, due to this being a beta. That said I too would like to see a bit more response from the developers here. It's hard to know for sure what's happening, although I trust they work really hard on improvements.

  3. #3
    Sencha User PhiLho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Near Paris, France
    Posts
    140
    Vote Rating
    1
    PhiLho is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Same opinion here. I have no experience of GXT 2, but I see GXT 3 is almost rewritten from scratch, to exploit the modern GWT features, and it is not an easy task.
    Indeed, hitting bugs is annoying, even more because we are not sure if that's our fault (wrong usage of the API) or a bug in the beta... But that's a calculated risk we took (ie. we have faith it will work better once in GA, if not perfect) by trying to develop with this version.

    The alternatives are to start with GXT 2, without these nice features (UiBinder seems critical to us) or to develop in pure GWT (missing important feature like live components). Or to use Vaadin, which is a good framework too, and lessen the need for some modern GWT features (I made a prototype with it too, and it works well).

    I find the developers to be present here, even if some questions remain unanswered, lack of time, or lack of answer. Sometime, it can be interesting to have even a negative answer from them (no shame in answering "I don't know", or "It cannot be done currently").

  4. #4
    Ext GWT Premium Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany, Solingen
    Posts
    247
    Vote Rating
    3
    gishmo is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    You are talking about a beta version. Don't expect stability and support as you would expect it from any released version. You cann't even be sure, that the API will not change in GXT 3 with the next beta!

    Did you ever write a widget lib? Do you know how much work this is?

    GXT 3 is fantastic! It is based on GWT widgets, it behaves like GWT and with GXT 3.0, thinks like Editor framework, Request Factory, UiBinder etc can be used.

    If you are familar with GWT, it is easy to use. Of course it is hard to use classes without documentation and easy examples. But that the price you have to pay when using a beta version.

    I started porting parts of a complex applications. It took some time before I got the layout running, Now I like it much more than GXT 2.x. I need less code to get the job done compared to GXT 2.x.

    I found several bugs or things that behave different compared to GXT 2.x, but no show stopper.

  5. #5
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    46
    Vote Rating
    0
    Konstantin.Scheglov is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Thank everyone for replies.
    Well, I understand that this is beta.
    I probably had too high expectations.
    Konstantin Scheglov

Thread Participants: 3