Google Web Toolkit Now 100% Open Source

chrisd writes "When we first released the Google Web Toolkit (GWT) we were focused on building a great tool for people to build AJAX apps with. Now, we're happy to announce that all of the GWT source code is available, including the Java to JavaScript compiler and the debugging browser, under the Apache 2.0 license. If you'd like to see how we pulled off letting you avoid dealing with nasty browser quirks, you should take a look. More importantly, we're running this like a true open source project now: we'll be developing GWT completely in the open, as per our project charter. More info on the GWT blog."

Re:A step in the right direction...

[clifgriffin]

That should read "the web isn't really structured"....

Sorry.

Um ya......

[jrwr00]

Found this under the GWT FAQ:

Does Google Web Toolkit send any information about me back to Google's servers?

When you use the Google Web Toolkit's hosted web browser, the application sends a request back to Google's servers to check to see if you are using the most recent version of the product. As a part of this request, Google will log usage data including a timestamp of the date and time you downloaded the Google Web Toolkit and the IP address for your computer. We won't log cookies or personal information about you, and we will use any data we log only in the aggregate to operate and improve the Google Web Toolkit and other Google Services. Please see the Google Privacy Policy for more information.

Re:Kudos on the licenses

[maxume]

If you are in a situation where you are working on a code base that you initiated but it has become a 85% you, 15% contributed situation, your ability to 'go binary' becomes pretty limited, depending on how that 85% is spread about. That's the point of the GPL of course, but if you start using it without realizing the implications, I can see how you would feel burned.

Re:Just as Sun release Java SE 6

[nuzak]

There is no overlap. In fact, the GWT only works with the Java 1.4 subset of the language (though you can run it on any 1.4 and up JVM, you just have to use -source 1.4). No generics, no enhanced looping, etc.

Java 6 SE includes Rhino (without E4X) which I suppose could be used as a target of the GWT for the server side, but it seems a tad pointless except maybe for validation of generated code.

Re:Kudos on the licenses

[Anonymous Coward]

GPL primarily has distribution restrictions. If you are just using modified GPL code internally, that is not a problem. If you are re-distributing (selling) the software, you need to provide the source code, including your modifications. I don't see the problem.

Your company doesn't want to "support" the software? Why would anyone want to purchase software from your company?

Devil's Advocate

[wralias]

From TFA [google.com]:

Writing dynamic web applications today is a tedious and error-prone process; you spend 90% of your time working around subtle incompatibilities between web browsers and platforms, and JavaScript's lack of modularity makes sharing, testing, and reusing AJAX components difficult and fragile.

Anyone who has done heavy work in JavaScript can attest to it's modularity; in fact, it is a very beautiful, expressive, and misunderstood language. Some folks claim that it is not object-oriented - but that is simply not true. It supports inheritance, static members, etc. - you just have to conceptualize them differently. I hesitate to trust the output or business logic of a program that "compiles" in javascript from another language, even if it is something so similar syntactically as Java is. I guess if you don't know JavaScript and you're uncomfortable with browser quirks, and you are a Java person, then this framework is for you. Bad news, though - you'll still need to figure out CSS, and that is a mind-fuck in and of itself.

Re:Wither AJAX

[whargoul]

With Java 7 under GPL, why would anyone develop an AJAX application instead of a signed Java applet? The reasons Java applets never took off were security concerns and limited consumer bandwidth. Both of these are less of a concern now and no more of a concern than running rich apps directly in the browser.

Time to make like it's nineteen-ninety-eight. Again.

I avoid Java applets as much as I can. Not because of security or bandwidth, but because they take so damn long to load and often cause the browser (IE or FF) to freeze until they're done loading.

Re:"JavaScript's lack of modularity" ?

[curunir]

The modularity lacking in Java is packaging and importing. As another poster mentioned, toolkits create the illusion that JavaScript has these, but it really doesn't. Somewhat less important is that there really isn't a true inheritance model. You can inherit another object's prototype, but that doesn't give you the same flexibility as true inheritance.

Re:Tapestry Integration?

[Valdukas]

If you are using Tapestry, depending on Tapestry's version it either has AJAX functionality built-in (v4.1) or available through add-on components (e.g. Tacos [sourceforge.net])

ZK

[Dan Farina]

This is good news, but I would highly suggest anyone looking at a tool such as GWT also look at ZK ( http://www.zkoss.org/ [zkoss.org] ).

While not technically competitors (GWT is all client side, ZK provides a way to handle AJAX requests automatically on the server side) they fill many of the same niches. There is an informative interview available ( http://blogs.pathf.com/agileajax/2006/06/an_interv iew_wi.html [pathf.com] )

If you want to jump straight into the ZK demo, check out http://www.zkoss.org/zkdemo/userguide/ [zkoss.org]

Re:A step in the right direction...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's nice to see Google sharing some of the tools they use because let's face it...Google's web apps (in particular gmail) are very impressive.

Look again: Google doesn't use GWT for any of their apps. Google bought GWT and open-sourced it.

It's an interesting tool, but it's not what's behind GMail or Google Maps.

Re:Umm...

[EvilKevin]

Yes, we do use this in some of our apps, the most recent of which is described here: http://googlebase.blogspot.com/2006/12/plastic-sur gery.html [blogspot.com]

TheServerSide presentation

[tedgoddard]

A "tech talk" on GWT is posted on TheServerSide [theserverside.com]. Of course, if you're generally interested in Ajax you should also check out the tech talk on Ajax Push with ICEfaces [icefaces.org] just below the GWT talk. In keeping with allowing the developer to write Ajax applications in pure Java, ICEfaces also promotes Ajax development without JavaScript.

Re:Devil's Advocate

[macshit]

They aren`t quite objects if you need to conceptualize them in a different way...

The phrase "object oriented" does not refer to single implementation technique, it refers to a general category of languages. Perhaps the majority of people are more familiar with C++/java style class-based designs, but there are many others. One of the most famous (in the research community at least) is "prototype based" languages, of which the "Self" language is the most well-known example. Javascript, it would seem, is a Self-style prototype-based language.

Re:A step in the right direction...

[Red Alastor]

You might be interested by this project that aims to create a tool just like GWT but for Python. http://pyjamas.pyworks.org/ [pyworks.org]

Their goal for 0.1 was all Google examples at least mostly working on Firefox and this is what they released. Their goal for 0.2 is all Google examples, completely working on all browsers.

I wouldn't use it yet in my projects but I'll keep an eye on it. I tried GWT and despite being Java, it's very sweet. I'm eager to be able to do the same thing with python.