The client console does not exist anymore. It was removed the code base (at least) two years ago.
Ali On 4 December 2013 21:38, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, just checking the output of the build. > > I have a "dist" folder with: > > pst.jar > wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar > wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar > > The old guide ( > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Building+Wave+in+a+Box#) > makes reference to > > waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar > waveinabox-server-0.3.jar > > in a "wave-protocol" directory. Neither the directory or those files exist. > I assume "waveinabox-server-0.3.jar" is now called > "wave-in-a-box-server-0.4-incubating.jar" > But is "waveinabox-client-console-0.3.jar" now > "wave-in-a-box-export-import-0.4-incubating.jar" ? > > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 4 December 2013 21:50, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Might be worth at some point looking into alternatives for multi-language >> support? >> Should be possible without multiplying compile times. >> I'll have to look into it once I am up and running. >> >> ~~~ >> Thomas & Bertines online review show: >> http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html >> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) >> >> >> On 4 December 2013 21:33, 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 >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >>
