Skip to content

R 1.2.1 #52

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
Nov 10, 2015
Merged

R 1.2.1 #52

merged 19 commits into from
Nov 10, 2015

Conversation

manolo
Copy link
Owner

@manolo manolo commented Nov 4, 2015

Review on Reviewable

connects to vaadin/components-team-tasks#34

@cwayfinder
Copy link
Contributor

The commit #1 ("Use more reliable way to detect when components are ready") is in master already.

@cwayfinder
Copy link
Contributor

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, 3 of 3 files at r2.
Review status: 3 of 11 files reviewed at latest revision, 2 unresolved discussions.


gulpfile.js, line 121 [r3] (raw file):
Please explain this change


gulpfile.js, line 176 [r3] (raw file):
Could it be replaced with

    if (helpers.isBehavior(item)) { 
       parseTemplate('Behavior', item, item.is, '', '');
    } else { 
       parseTemplate('Element', item, item.is, '', 'Element');
    }

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@manolo
Copy link
Owner Author

manolo commented Nov 4, 2015

Review status: 3 of 11 files reviewed at latest revision, 2 unresolved discussions.


gulpfile.js, line 121 [r3] (raw file):
It's just a aesthetic change, IDE (Eclipse) complains when a property is named as a reserved word although it's legal in js. I dont think it needs any comment in code.


gulpfile.js, line 176 [r3] (raw file):
Done.


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@Saulis
Copy link
Contributor

Saulis commented Nov 5, 2015

I'm assuming you've tested this version of the generator with gwt-polymer-elements showcase?


Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, 2 of 3 files at r2, 2 of 8 files at r3, 1 of 1 files at r4, 4 of 5 files at r5, 1 of 1 files at r8, 2 of 2 files at r9.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 5 unresolved discussions.


bin/gwt-api-generator.js, line 12 [r9] (raw file):
Why isn't package required anymore ?


gulpfile.js, line 121 [r3] (raw file):
I'd rather have this as a normal function call. Can't you tell Eclipse to ignore the error?


gulpfile.js, line 52 [r9] (raw file):
Redundant done argument.


lib/com/vaadin/polymer/Polymer.java, line 278 [r9] (raw file):
Extra whitespace between static and void


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@manolo
Copy link
Owner Author

manolo commented Nov 5, 2015

Yes I've tested it and I'm working using this branch


Review status: 12 of 13 files reviewed at latest revision, 5 unresolved discussions.


bin/gwt-api-generator.js, line 12 [r9] (raw file):

--package is thought for defining which polymer packages use to generate java classes. Then bower downloads those packages to the resources folder and parses them. That's perfect for predefined projects like we do in gwt-polymer-elements
Though, I want an easier usage. The gwt user just install bower packages in its java project and run the script each time he wants for instance, if I have the showcase project (demo folder) I just do:

$ bower install vaadin/vaadin-grid#master
$ gwt-api-generator

and voila, I have all the grid wrapped and ready in my src/main/java and src/main/resources
So I'm not deprecating --package argument just not making it mandatory


gulpfile.js, line 121 [r3] (raw file):
No


gulpfile.js, line 52 [r9] (raw file):
Done.


lib/com/vaadin/polymer/Polymer.java, line 278 [r9] (raw file):
Done.


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@Saulis
Copy link
Contributor

Saulis commented Nov 5, 2015

Review status: 11 of 13 files reviewed at latest revision, 3 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed.


bin/gwt-api-generator.js, line 12 [r9] (raw file):
OK I see now. Would it be a good idea to add a instructions or some sort of a help message when you run gwt-api-generator without --package and don't have a bower_components folder? Because I tried that nothing just happened - didn't get any log messages or nothing that would tell me what's wrong.


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@manolo manolo force-pushed the r_1.2.1 branch 2 times, most recently from 4666382 to d1e0cc9 Compare November 5, 2015 13:05
We try to select a better signature than String if there
are multiple behaviors.

Put all iron/paper common events in the same namespace.
@manolo
Copy link
Owner Author

manolo commented Nov 6, 2015

Review status: 7 of 14 files reviewed at latest revision, 3 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed.


bin/gwt-api-generator.js, line 12 [r9] (raw file):
Modified README


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

@manolo manolo force-pushed the r_1.2.1 branch 2 times, most recently from 18bed80 to 29be7b2 Compare November 7, 2015 18:24
@Saulis
Copy link
Contributor

Saulis commented Nov 8, 2015

Reviewed 1 of 6 files at r12, 1 of 2 files at r18.
Review status: 8 of 14 files reviewed at latest revision, 5 unresolved discussions.


bin/gwt-api-generator.js, line 12 [r9] (raw file):
What I had in mind was some kind indicator when you just run the gwt-api-generator without any parameters and bower_components is empty. Currently nothing just happens.

How about adding a console.log messages when generating from a folder? For example: 'No --package provided. Generating 0 package(s) located under bower_components'


gulpfile.js, line 238 [r18] (raw file):
I think the else clause could just be if (!args.excludeLib) and the we could get rid of the done argument.


README.md, line 21 [r18] (raw file):
missing closing ```


Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

Saulis added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2015
@Saulis Saulis merged commit afa485a into master Nov 10, 2015
@Saulis Saulis removed the in review label Nov 10, 2015
@Saulis Saulis deleted the r_1.2.1 branch November 10, 2015 08:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants