You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@wicket.apache.org by Daniel Carleton <da...@pobox.com> on 2007/10/15 01:12:19 UTC
Wicket Article on DevX
Hello Wicket,
I wrote an introductory article on Wicket for DevX, which they
published a few days back (will go front page after a few typos are
fixed). I tried to include lots of practical information on the
framework's design and usage. I hope it helps to turn more people on
to Wicket!
http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/35620
Congratulations on the upcoming 1.3 release, and thanks to everyone
on IRC (esp. chillenious, matej, and ivaynberg) who fielded my Wicket
questions all summer.
- Daniel (dacc)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Roland Kaercher <ic...@rolandkaercher.de>.
Yes, you're right, I didn't read it again. But it also got me to
switch to jetty because IIRC the the memory overhead for using tomcat
5 (I heard tomcat 6 is different there) when just starting up my tiny
apps was significantly higher - although it might be less dramatic
than I have in memory ;-)
Regards,
Roland
On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
> The article seems to be more advocating running multiple JVMs if you are
> prepared to run a front end proxy to put everything back under the same
> ip/port? Presumably you could do the same with Tomcat etc..?
>
> The runtime usage of Jetty vs Tomcat would be interesting but as always
> turns out it is very application specific and 9 times out of 10 the
> application(s) you are running will consume more memory/CPU than the
> container... Sure we've all seen the apps that are doing something
> complicated to the database for every request...
>
>
> Roland Kaercher wrote:
> >
> > Nathan has written a nice article on jetty which made me to switch to
> > jetty for deployment too:
> > http://technically.us/code/x/to-jettison-geronimo/
> >
> > (and no, I did not regret it)
> >
> > regards,
> > Roland
> >
> > On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Congratulaions on the article.
> >>
> >> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
> >> Is
> >> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
> >> killer
> >> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Sam
> >> --
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13213821
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
The article seems to be more advocating running multiple JVMs if you are
prepared to run a front end proxy to put everything back under the same
ip/port? Presumably you could do the same with Tomcat etc..?
The runtime usage of Jetty vs Tomcat would be interesting but as always
turns out it is very application specific and 9 times out of 10 the
application(s) you are running will consume more memory/CPU than the
container... Sure we've all seen the apps that are doing something
complicated to the database for every request...
Roland Kaercher wrote:
>
> Nathan has written a nice article on jetty which made me to switch to
> jetty for deployment too:
> http://technically.us/code/x/to-jettison-geronimo/
>
> (and no, I did not regret it)
>
> regards,
> Roland
>
> On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>>
>> Congratulaions on the article.
>>
>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
>> Is
>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
>> killer
>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Sam
>> --
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13213821
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Roland Kaercher <ic...@rolandkaercher.de>.
Nathan has written a nice article on jetty which made me to switch to
jetty for deployment too:
http://technically.us/code/x/to-jettison-geronimo/
(and no, I did not regret it)
regards,
Roland
On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
> Congratulaions on the article.
>
> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit. Is
> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a killer
> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>
> Cheers
>
> Sam
> --
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Matej Knopp <ma...@gmail.com>.
We mostly use jetty as embedded in the project itself. Then starting a
web application is as simple as starting any other java application.
Also debugging is much simpler. No need to configure remote debug
connection, not to mention that you need to configure separate ports
if you want to debug e.g. 2 application instances.
-Matej
On 10/15/07, Gwyn Evans <gw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
> > I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit. Is
> > that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a killer
> > advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>
> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>
> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>
> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>
> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>
> /Gwyn
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by james yong <i_...@yahoo.com.sg>.
Tomcat doesn't requires you to deploy with a war file. Check out setting the
context in conf/server.xml
james yong
Gwyn wrote:
>
>
> Even better, when developing you dont
> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>
> /Gwyn
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13213711
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
Doesn't sound that different from tomcat... I don't build a war or anything
and run it just like any java application... Read somewhere that jetty lets
you take out JSP support. I've found with Tomcat that it spends a lot of
time looking for taglib defs in lucene.jar, wicket.jar... Current project
uses hibernate which is so slow starting up it hides that problem though.
Cheers
Sam
Gwyn wrote:
>
> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
>> Is
>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
>> killer
>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>
> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>
> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>
> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>
> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>
> /Gwyn
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13210890
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by shumbola <sh...@yahoo.com>.
I'm fun of Winstone, too. Before switching to wicket I used to use it for
struts based applications.
The only small "fix" I did into Winstone is that I've added clientAuth flag,
so I can use command line to tell Winstone use client authentication or not
use.
Gwyn wrote:
>
> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>
> /Gwyn
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13212322
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Gwyn Evans <gw...@gmail.com>.
On Monday, October 15, 2007, 1:35:25 PM, Erik <e....@grons.nl> wrote:
> Of course you can startup Tomcat from Eclipse just as well
>> I seem to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java
>> source.
> I tried this with Jetty 6. Hardly any documentation or complete examples
> to be found. So I switched back to Jetty 4 for which I had an example
> from an old wicket-quickstart.
Just for info, the 'new' wicket-quickstart, generated by the archetype
includes the Jetty 6 Start.java, although personally, I use the
Winstone IDEA plugin.
/Gwyn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Erik van Oosten <e....@grons.nl>.
Of course you can startup Tomcat from Eclipse just as well :)
> I seem to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java
> source.
I tried this with Jetty 6. Hardly any documentation or complete examples
to be found. So I switched back to Jetty 4 for which I had an example
from an old wicket-quickstart.
Tomcat at least has a very decent and understandable embedded java
interface.
Regards,
Erik.
Sam Hough wrote:
> Still can't see why you can't do "local" debugging with Tomcat. From eclipse
> you just start it as an application with main class
> "org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap"... I also run Tomcat in OptimizeIt
> without any remoting...
>
> I've no agenda about Tomcat. Was just curious about the preference. I seem
> to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java source.
> Presumably it is also still much smaller.
>
> Cheers
>
> Sam
>
>
>
> Nino.Martinez wrote:
>
>> theres a equallent to mvn jetty:run called mvn tomcat:run...
>>
>> If devs decided to give up mvn jetty:run then we would loose support for
>> debuging with start.java ... As Matej mentions..
>>
>> regards Nino
>>
>> Gwyn Evans wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
>>>> Is
>>>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
>>>> killer
>>>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>>>
>>> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
>>> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
>>> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
>>> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
>>> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
>>> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>>>
>>> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
>>> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
>>> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>>>
>>> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
>>> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
>>> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>>>
>>> /Gwyn
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Erik van Oosten
http://2008.rubyenrails.nl/
http://www.day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
Nope, and you can also debug that one, you just need to pass the
releveant parameters to the jvm.....
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> The embedded tomcat was not that hard to install, not harder than
> creating a jetty quickstart.
>
> Martijn
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
The embedded tomcat was not that hard to install, not harder than
creating a jetty quickstart.
Martijn
--
Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta4 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta4/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
I hacked tomcat down and it is still 3.3M! As you say also need to fiddle
with server.xml etc... I've not used the juli based logging version but in
the past logging has been a real pain. Sooo frustrating to want to test
something interesting only to be held up by (&*(*& logging.
Why am I using Tomcat again? ;)
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
>
> Well, I guess you can. Still you need to have tomcat installed,
> whereas with jetty you only need a 300kb jar in project. Also as
> stated above, you don't need JSP support (compiler, etc) so the
> footprint is really small.
>
> -Matej
>
> On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>>
>> Still can't see why you can't do "local" debugging with Tomcat. From
>> eclipse
>> you just start it as an application with main class
>> "org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap"... I also run Tomcat in
>> OptimizeIt
>> without any remoting...
>>
>> I've no agenda about Tomcat. Was just curious about the preference. I
>> seem
>> to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java source.
>> Presumably it is also still much smaller.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Sam
>>
>>
>>
>> Nino.Martinez wrote:
>> >
>> > theres a equallent to mvn jetty:run called mvn tomcat:run...
>> >
>> > If devs decided to give up mvn jetty:run then we would loose support
>> for
>> > debuging with start.java ... As Matej mentions..
>> >
>> > regards Nino
>> >
>> > Gwyn Evans wrote:
>> >> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container"
>> bit.
>> >>> Is
>> >>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
>> >>> killer
>> >>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>> >>
>> >> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
>> >> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
>> >> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
>> >> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
>> >> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
>> >> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>> >>
>> >> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
>> >> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
>> >> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>> >>
>> >> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
>> >> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
>> >> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
>> >> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>> >>
>> >> /Gwyn
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13211292
>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13212117
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Matej Knopp <ma...@gmail.com>.
Well, I guess you can. Still you need to have tomcat installed,
whereas with jetty you only need a 300kb jar in project. Also as
stated above, you don't need JSP support (compiler, etc) so the
footprint is really small.
-Matej
On 10/15/07, Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
> Still can't see why you can't do "local" debugging with Tomcat. From eclipse
> you just start it as an application with main class
> "org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap"... I also run Tomcat in OptimizeIt
> without any remoting...
>
> I've no agenda about Tomcat. Was just curious about the preference. I seem
> to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java source.
> Presumably it is also still much smaller.
>
> Cheers
>
> Sam
>
>
>
> Nino.Martinez wrote:
> >
> > theres a equallent to mvn jetty:run called mvn tomcat:run...
> >
> > If devs decided to give up mvn jetty:run then we would loose support for
> > debuging with start.java ... As Matej mentions..
> >
> > regards Nino
> >
> > Gwyn Evans wrote:
> >> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
> >>> Is
> >>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
> >>> killer
> >>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
> >>>
> >>
> >> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
> >>
> >> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
> >> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
> >> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
> >> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
> >> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
> >> in seconds and includes hotswap.
> >>
> >> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
> >> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
> >> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
> >>
> >> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
> >> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
> >> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
> >> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
> >>
> >> /Gwyn
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13211292
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
Still can't see why you can't do "local" debugging with Tomcat. From eclipse
you just start it as an application with main class
"org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap"... I also run Tomcat in OptimizeIt
without any remoting...
I've no agenda about Tomcat. Was just curious about the preference. I seem
to remember that Jetty is vastly easier to configure from Java source.
Presumably it is also still much smaller.
Cheers
Sam
Nino.Martinez wrote:
>
> theres a equallent to mvn jetty:run called mvn tomcat:run...
>
> If devs decided to give up mvn jetty:run then we would loose support for
> debuging with start.java ... As Matej mentions..
>
> regards Nino
>
> Gwyn Evans wrote:
>> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit.
>>> Is
>>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a
>>> killer
>>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>>>
>>
>> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>>
>> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
>> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
>> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
>> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
>> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
>> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>>
>> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
>> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
>> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>>
>> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
>> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
>> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
>> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>>
>> /Gwyn
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13211292
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
theres a equallent to mvn jetty:run called mvn tomcat:run...
If devs decided to give up mvn jetty:run then we would loose support for
debuging with start.java ... As Matej mentions..
regards Nino
Gwyn Evans wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit. Is
>> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a killer
>> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
>>
>
> [Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
>
> The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
> jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
> need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
> wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
> simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
> in seconds and includes hotswap.
>
> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>
> Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
> results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
> non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
> http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
>
> /Gwyn
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Gerolf Seitz <ge...@gmail.com>.
On 10/15/07, Gwyn Evans <gw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
> mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
> 'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
>
we don't need that in Start.java, because Al changed it, so that the
quickstart app
is mounted at '/', which makes perfectly sense for the quickstart.
gerolf
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Gwyn Evans <gw...@gmail.com>.
On Monday, October 15, 2007, 11:56:55 AM, Sam <sa...@redspr.com> wrote:
> I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit. Is
> that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a killer
> advantage over the more common Tomcat?
[Reposting a paragraph of Igor's to start, in case it looks familiar!]
The advantages are that you can quickly get your app running using mvn
jetty:jetty command if you want. Even better, when developing you dont
need to package your app into a war and deploy it - which are big time
wasting steps when you have to do them every ten minutes - instead
simply launch the included Start.java and your app is up and running
in seconds and includes hotswap.
One thing I like about Jetty is that it's normally clear to see what's
mounted where, as the default '/' servlet will list them when running
'mvn jetty:run' (although that's not in our Start.java).
Of course, having said that, I need to say that I'm having good
results with Winstone, where Jetty was having issues (with the
non-Wicket connected part of a legacy web-app) - see
http://www.nabble.com/Wicket%2C-IDEA-and-Winstone...-p12919201.html
/Gwyn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
Congratulaions on the article.
I was interested by the "encourages the use of the Jetty container" bit. Is
that more that the core Wicket developers prefer Jetty or is there a killer
advantage over the more common Tomcat?
Cheers
Sam
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13210308
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Sam Hough <sa...@redspr.com>.
Daniel,
Sorry for starting an emacs vs vi debate. Really is a nice article. Anything
to drag people out of the struts dark ages!
Cheers
Sam
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13214216
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Jonathan Locke <jo...@gmail.com>.
*2
igor.vaynberg wrote:
>
> +1
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 10/14/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Daniel, great stuff! Thanks!
>>
>> Eelco
>>
>> On 10/14/07, Daniel Carleton <da...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> > Hello Wicket,
>> >
>> > I wrote an introductory article on Wicket for DevX, which they
>> > published a few days back (will go front page after a few typos are
>> > fixed). I tried to include lots of practical information on the
>> > framework's design and usage. I hope it helps to turn more people on
>> > to Wicket!
>> >
>> > http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/35620
>> >
>> > Congratulations on the upcoming 1.3 release, and thanks to everyone
>> > on IRC (esp. chillenious, matej, and ivaynberg) who fielded my Wicket
>> > questions all summer.
>> >
>> > - Daniel (dacc)
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Article-on-DevX-tf4623720.html#a13222153
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
+1
-igor
On 10/14/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Daniel, great stuff! Thanks!
>
> Eelco
>
> On 10/14/07, Daniel Carleton <da...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > Hello Wicket,
> >
> > I wrote an introductory article on Wicket for DevX, which they
> > published a few days back (will go front page after a few typos are
> > fixed). I tried to include lots of practical information on the
> > framework's design and usage. I hope it helps to turn more people on
> > to Wicket!
> >
> > http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/35620
> >
> > Congratulations on the upcoming 1.3 release, and thanks to everyone
> > on IRC (esp. chillenious, matej, and ivaynberg) who fielded my Wicket
> > questions all summer.
> >
> > - Daniel (dacc)
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: Wicket Article on DevX
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Hey Daniel, great stuff! Thanks!
Eelco
On 10/14/07, Daniel Carleton <da...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Hello Wicket,
>
> I wrote an introductory article on Wicket for DevX, which they
> published a few days back (will go front page after a few typos are
> fixed). I tried to include lots of practical information on the
> framework's design and usage. I hope it helps to turn more people on
> to Wicket!
>
> http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/35620
>
> Congratulations on the upcoming 1.3 release, and thanks to everyone
> on IRC (esp. chillenious, matej, and ivaynberg) who fielded my Wicket
> questions all summer.
>
> - Daniel (dacc)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org