My own GWT projects...even the most massive...compiles in 5 minutes tops. And normally you don't need to compile - you just run and hit refresh for *instant* updates. This isn't the norm.
~~~ Thomas & Bertines online review show: http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) On 4 December 2013 21:43, Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> wrote: > (And people wonder why I want to move away from gwt) > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Permutation is not only per browser, it is also per language and I think > > WIAB supports 4 languages. > > Anyway, it is very strange it took 4 hours, probably 2 GB is too little, > > you ll need about 4 GB. > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> 32??? There isnt 32 different browser engines is there :? > >> My own GWT projects, (using 2.5.1) use 7 at most. (and even that should > go > >> down in newer versions as Opera phase's out Presto.) > >> > >> It wasn't GWT permutations taking the bulk of the time anyway, mind > you - > >> it seemed to mostly be the testing and (strangely) expanding JAR files. > >> That was just my perception though. Certainly before it got to > >> "compile-gwt:" took at least 4 hours. > >> Would the log help here? > >> > >> My machine is a 4200 dual core Amd. Not much ram (2GB), was running > chrome > >> at the same time, but not doing anything intensive. I wouldn't be > surprised > >> if my machine is to blame here, but I cant think why it would be this > >> different. > >> --- > >> Anyway, dinner now, then back to poking at things. > >> > >> > >> ~~~ > >> Thomas & Bertines online review show: > >> http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > >> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > >> > >> > >> On 4 December 2013 20:59, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > We have 32 GWT permutations the moment, we used to have only 4... Some > >> last > >> > changes caused this increase... We need to be more cautious about > >> updating > >> > GWT client code. > >> > I tried > >> > ant clean dist-server compile-gwt test > >> > It took me about 16 minutes. If you tried the default target which > also > >> > includes running tests then it could take about 6 minutes more. > >> > So max 21 minutes on 2-core laptop. This is for the full prod build, > if > >> you > >> > run the server from compiled source with dev GWT setting(only 2 > >> > permutations) then it takes only a few minutes, or even less. > >> > > >> > Basically running wave is simple like: > >> > > >> > git clone git://git.apache.org/wave.git wave > >> > cd wave > >> > cp server.config.example server.config > >> > ant dist-server compile-gwt run-server > >> > Open the browser at http://localhost:9898 > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> > > > "BUILD SUCCESSFUL > >> > > > Total time: 312 minutes 41 seconds" > >> > > > >> > > Err.. it takes ~5 minutes on my dev machine! Is this a single core > vm, > >> > > doing lots of swapping, and with shared io? > >> > > > >> > > > Suggestion; > >> > > > Would it be possible to have a virtual machine with everything > set up > >> > > > already? or is there technical/license reasons for that to be > >> > unsuitable? > >> > > > >> > > I suspect this would be difficult. (And you don't really want to be > in > >> a > >> > > VM). > >> > > > >> > > > Query: > >> > > > Can Wave be updated to JDK7? is there big issues holding it back > ? Or > >> > is > >> > > > there more open alternatives we can use instead - one that doesn't > >> > > require > >> > > > handing over personal details to a company? > >> > > > >> > > (OpenJDK 1.6 works fine, so...) > >> > > > >> > > This is quite difficult to do for the codebase. You would also need > to > >> > > upgrade all the third-party components. > >> > > > >> > > Please continue to provide feedback. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks. > >> > > Ali > >> > > > >> > > >> >
