You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@wicket.apache.org by Susan Liebeskind <su...@gtri.gatech.edu> on 2008/11/23 13:49:37 UTC
Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on
1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
My project team has decided we will go with Wicket to replace our aging
Struts 1.x infrastructure, so we're starting to learn to use Wicket in
earnest. The next question we face is whether to use Wicket 1.3 or
Wicket 1.4.
Since Wicket 1.4 is at RC1, and there is substantial use of generics in
Wicket 1.4, our belief is that it makes sense for use to start out using
Wicket 1.4RC1. The logic is that since the 1.4 release is at RC1,
things are pretty stable and methods/interfaces are not going to change
in any significant way.
Is that a fair assumption to make? For those experienced Wicket
developers on the list, would you recommend starting brand new
development now with Wicket 1.4RC1 or fall back to Wicket 1.3.5?
----
My problem is that I'm trying to work through the examples for Wicket in
Action (version 0.9, available from
http://code.google.com/p/wicketinaction/downloads/list) with my trusty
hardcopy of the book in hand, and translate from what I am reading about
in Wicket 1.3.x to the new genericized approach built into Wicket 1.4.
I was hoping that the migration guide at the URL
http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrate-14.html but unfortunately, the
information I need to get the Wicket in Action 0.9 example code up and
running is not in that guide.
Alas, a March posting on the user list regarding Wicket in Action's
support for 1.4 which suggested that one should be able to ignore the
compiler warnings about generics didn't play out -- I'm getting errors,
not warnings I can ignore.
The change log for 1.4RC1 consists of a links to JIRA tickets, which
requires some slogging through many detailed bug reports. When one is is
new to a software technology, it's hard to see the forest for the trees
sometimes, and I don't think I have enough experience in Wicket to be
able to make much sense of a trudge through those bug reports...just yet.
I did locate an old news posting here
(http://wicket.apache.org/wicket-14-m3-news.html) which covered the
switchover to a non-genericized Component class. This news item told me
how to solve the errors I was seeing with Component.[get|set]Model et.
al, in the Wicket in Action example code, by replacing these calls with
Component.[get|set]DefaultModel. That's getting me further (and I'm
also happy to contribute my diffs back to the authors if they are
interested). Perhaps that snippet can be added to the migration guide now?
But the overall sparseness of the 1.3-1.4 migration guide as of this
writing, makes me suspicious that there are perhaps some subtleties in
the migration process that I, as a newbie, will miss. Perhaps there are
changes I should be making to this example code, even though things are
nearly compiling, but those changes/best practices are simply are not
yet documented. These are the kinds of issues that can come back to
haunt you if you start development with a less-than final release :-(
So perhaps we should be sticking with Wicket 1.3 because the examples
and documentation is more readily available for a pre-genericized
Wicket? And also, because there is no date for when the 1.4 final
release will be available, and things still could change?
Or use Wicket 1.4RC1 and be optimistic that we're close enough to the
final product, even though the documentation isn't out there yet to
support this release, and it will be slower going at first?
Any advice for people just starting out?
Thanks.
Susan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development
on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by fstof <fr...@fnb.co.za>.
Okay... so the end of year came and gone... any new ideas?
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
> ideally when bug count is zero. But were aiming before years end IMO.
>
> Martijn
>
> On 11/24/08, Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>> The API is pretty locked for now - only a significant bug found would
>> cause
>> a change. A significant bug is fairly unlikely considering that so many
>> people are running production apps against it already and the changes
>> from
>> 1.3 -> 1.4 were not many (functionally).
>>
>> I don't know about a date for 1.4 at this time - Igor? Frank / etc???
>>
>> I just added a paragraph to the migration page regarding this change (
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migrate-1.4#Migrate-1.4-getModelnamechange
>> ).
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> http://www.wickettraining.com
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Susan Liebeskind <
>> susan.liebeskind@gtri.gatech.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 1.4-rc1 is safe to go with (my opinion - i have quite a few apps
>>>> currently
>>>> deployed on various versions of 1.4 (m2 / m3 / and now rc1).
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So long as the interfaces are NOT likely to make major changes (where
>>> major
>>> = along the lines of the getModel -> getDefaultModel changeover), then
>>> I'm
>>> okay with going with 1.4-rc1. I also noticed that the QuickStart maven
>>> archetype works with 1.4-rc1 (it had problems with 1.4-m3 generics), so
>>> that's also a good sign that 1.4rc1 is stable.
>>>
>>> And let me ask: is there any more resolution on when 1.4 final will be
>>> out,
>>> given that RC1 is on the street? Or you just cannot predict a date at
>>> this
>>> time?
>>>
>>> You go on to describe problems with differences between 1.3 / 1.4 - what
>>>> errors are you specifically seeing? I think everything is pretty well
>>>> documented, but something could be missed. The biggest difference
>>>> (other
>>>> than generics) was probably the getModel() -> getDefaultModel() change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The POM file needed some fixing up due to changes in the Spring library
>>> packaging - that was mentioned on the Wicket Migration page, so it was
>>> easy
>>> to resolve that. It was the getModel->getDefaultModel change that took
>>> some digging to find out, and which wasn't on the migration page.
>>> If the powers that be could add something about the method name change
>>> to
>>> the current migration page, that would be very helpful to others who
>>> will
>>> be
>>> migrating from 1.3. I'm feeling a bit too new to the game to feek
>>> comfortable updating the page (and that would also be making the
>>> assumption
>>> that folks other than committers can add to the Wiki which I haven't yet
>>> tried to do).
>>>
>>> Start a new thread for the errors you are seeing and we will help.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks. I know I can get rid of the compiler errors on my own (20+ uses
>>> of
>>> the older get/setModel to replace), so I'm not too worried about that.
>>>
>>> But do you have a sense of any best practices/metaphors new for 1.4? I
>>> don't see anything new on the wiki for 1.4 on the best practices page
>>> and
>>> that's a more subtle issue when it comes to working with the newer
>>> release
>>> -
>>> how should I be coding differently, if at all, now that we have this
>>> genericized framework? Should I start a new thread about best practices
>>> for
>>> 1.4?
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>>>
>>> Susan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
> Apache Wicket 1.3.4 is released
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/Stability-of-Wicket-1.4RC1-methods-interfaces%3A-new-development-on-1.3.5-or-1.4RC1--tp20645896p21827992.html
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: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
ideally when bug count is zero. But were aiming before years end IMO.
Martijn
On 11/24/08, Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> The API is pretty locked for now - only a significant bug found would cause
> a change. A significant bug is fairly unlikely considering that so many
> people are running production apps against it already and the changes from
> 1.3 -> 1.4 were not many (functionally).
>
> I don't know about a date for 1.4 at this time - Igor? Frank / etc???
>
> I just added a paragraph to the migration page regarding this change (
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migrate-1.4#Migrate-1.4-getModelnamechange
> ).
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://www.wickettraining.com
>
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Susan Liebeskind <
> susan.liebeskind@gtri.gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>> Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>
>>> 1.4-rc1 is safe to go with (my opinion - i have quite a few apps
>>> currently
>>> deployed on various versions of 1.4 (m2 / m3 / and now rc1).
>>>
>>>
>> So long as the interfaces are NOT likely to make major changes (where
>> major
>> = along the lines of the getModel -> getDefaultModel changeover), then I'm
>> okay with going with 1.4-rc1. I also noticed that the QuickStart maven
>> archetype works with 1.4-rc1 (it had problems with 1.4-m3 generics), so
>> that's also a good sign that 1.4rc1 is stable.
>>
>> And let me ask: is there any more resolution on when 1.4 final will be
>> out,
>> given that RC1 is on the street? Or you just cannot predict a date at this
>> time?
>>
>> You go on to describe problems with differences between 1.3 / 1.4 - what
>>> errors are you specifically seeing? I think everything is pretty well
>>> documented, but something could be missed. The biggest difference (other
>>> than generics) was probably the getModel() -> getDefaultModel() change.
>>>
>>>
>> The POM file needed some fixing up due to changes in the Spring library
>> packaging - that was mentioned on the Wicket Migration page, so it was
>> easy
>> to resolve that. It was the getModel->getDefaultModel change that took
>> some digging to find out, and which wasn't on the migration page.
>> If the powers that be could add something about the method name change to
>> the current migration page, that would be very helpful to others who will
>> be
>> migrating from 1.3. I'm feeling a bit too new to the game to feek
>> comfortable updating the page (and that would also be making the
>> assumption
>> that folks other than committers can add to the Wiki which I haven't yet
>> tried to do).
>>
>> Start a new thread for the errors you are seeing and we will help.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. I know I can get rid of the compiler errors on my own (20+ uses of
>> the older get/setModel to replace), so I'm not too worried about that.
>>
>> But do you have a sense of any best practices/metaphors new for 1.4? I
>> don't see anything new on the wiki for 1.4 on the best practices page and
>> that's a more subtle issue when it comes to working with the newer release
>> -
>> how should I be coding differently, if at all, now that we have this
>> genericized framework? Should I start a new thread about best practices
>> for
>> 1.4?
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>>
>> Susan
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Apache Wicket 1.3.4 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
The API is pretty locked for now - only a significant bug found would cause
a change. A significant bug is fairly unlikely considering that so many
people are running production apps against it already and the changes from
1.3 -> 1.4 were not many (functionally).
I don't know about a date for 1.4 at this time - Igor? Frank / etc???
I just added a paragraph to the migration page regarding this change (
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migrate-1.4#Migrate-1.4-getModelnamechange
).
Hope this helps!
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Susan Liebeskind <
susan.liebeskind@gtri.gatech.edu> wrote:
> Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>
>> 1.4-rc1 is safe to go with (my opinion - i have quite a few apps currently
>> deployed on various versions of 1.4 (m2 / m3 / and now rc1).
>>
>>
> So long as the interfaces are NOT likely to make major changes (where major
> = along the lines of the getModel -> getDefaultModel changeover), then I'm
> okay with going with 1.4-rc1. I also noticed that the QuickStart maven
> archetype works with 1.4-rc1 (it had problems with 1.4-m3 generics), so
> that's also a good sign that 1.4rc1 is stable.
>
> And let me ask: is there any more resolution on when 1.4 final will be out,
> given that RC1 is on the street? Or you just cannot predict a date at this
> time?
>
> You go on to describe problems with differences between 1.3 / 1.4 - what
>> errors are you specifically seeing? I think everything is pretty well
>> documented, but something could be missed. The biggest difference (other
>> than generics) was probably the getModel() -> getDefaultModel() change.
>>
>>
> The POM file needed some fixing up due to changes in the Spring library
> packaging - that was mentioned on the Wicket Migration page, so it was easy
> to resolve that. It was the getModel->getDefaultModel change that took
> some digging to find out, and which wasn't on the migration page.
> If the powers that be could add something about the method name change to
> the current migration page, that would be very helpful to others who will be
> migrating from 1.3. I'm feeling a bit too new to the game to feek
> comfortable updating the page (and that would also be making the assumption
> that folks other than committers can add to the Wiki which I haven't yet
> tried to do).
>
> Start a new thread for the errors you are seeing and we will help.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks. I know I can get rid of the compiler errors on my own (20+ uses of
> the older get/setModel to replace), so I'm not too worried about that.
>
> But do you have a sense of any best practices/metaphors new for 1.4? I
> don't see anything new on the wiki for 1.4 on the best practices page and
> that's a more subtle issue when it comes to working with the newer release -
> how should I be coding differently, if at all, now that we have this
> genericized framework? Should I start a new thread about best practices for
> 1.4?
>
> Thanks again.
>
>
> Susan
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development
on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by Susan Liebeskind <su...@gtri.gatech.edu>.
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> 1.4-rc1 is safe to go with (my opinion - i have quite a few apps currently
> deployed on various versions of 1.4 (m2 / m3 / and now rc1).
>
So long as the interfaces are NOT likely to make major changes (where
major = along the lines of the getModel -> getDefaultModel changeover),
then I'm okay with going with 1.4-rc1.
I also noticed that the QuickStart maven archetype works with 1.4-rc1
(it had problems with 1.4-m3 generics), so that's also a good sign that
1.4rc1 is stable.
And let me ask: is there any more resolution on when 1.4 final will be
out, given that RC1 is on the street? Or you just cannot predict a date
at this time?
> You go on to describe problems with differences between 1.3 / 1.4 - what
> errors are you specifically seeing? I think everything is pretty well
> documented, but something could be missed. The biggest difference (other
> than generics) was probably the getModel() -> getDefaultModel() change.
>
The POM file needed some fixing up due to changes in the Spring library
packaging - that was mentioned on the Wicket Migration page, so it was
easy to resolve that. It was the getModel->getDefaultModel change that
took some digging to find out, and which wasn't on the migration page.
If the powers that be could add something about the method name change
to the current migration page, that would be very helpful to others who
will be migrating from 1.3. I'm feeling a bit too new to the game to
feek comfortable updating the page (and that would also be making the
assumption that folks other than committers can add to the Wiki which I
haven't yet tried to do).
> Start a new thread for the errors you are seeing and we will help.
>
Thanks. I know I can get rid of the compiler errors on my own (20+ uses
of the older get/setModel to replace), so I'm not too worried about that.
But do you have a sense of any best practices/metaphors new for 1.4? I
don't see anything new on the wiki for 1.4 on the best practices page
and that's a more subtle issue when it comes to working with the newer
release - how should I be coding differently, if at all, now that we
have this genericized framework? Should I start a new thread about best
practices for 1.4?
Thanks again.
Susan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
1.4-rc1 is safe to go with (my opinion - i have quite a few apps currently
deployed on various versions of 1.4 (m2 / m3 / and now rc1).
You go on to describe problems with differences between 1.3 / 1.4 - what
errors are you specifically seeing? I think everything is pretty well
documented, but something could be missed. The biggest difference (other
than generics) was probably the getModel() -> getDefaultModel() change.
Start a new thread for the errors you are seeing and we will help.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Susan Liebeskind <
susan.liebeskind@gtri.gatech.edu> wrote:
> My project team has decided we will go with Wicket to replace our aging
> Struts 1.x infrastructure, so we're starting to learn to use Wicket in
> earnest. The next question we face is whether to use Wicket 1.3 or Wicket
> 1.4.
>
> Since Wicket 1.4 is at RC1, and there is substantial use of generics in
> Wicket 1.4, our belief is that it makes sense for use to start out using
> Wicket 1.4RC1. The logic is that since the 1.4 release is at RC1, things
> are pretty stable and methods/interfaces are not going to change in any
> significant way.
> Is that a fair assumption to make? For those experienced Wicket developers
> on the list, would you recommend starting brand new development now with
> Wicket 1.4RC1 or fall back to Wicket 1.3.5?
>
> ----
>
> My problem is that I'm trying to work through the examples for Wicket in
> Action (version 0.9, available from
> http://code.google.com/p/wicketinaction/downloads/list) with my trusty
> hardcopy of the book in hand, and translate from what I am reading about in
> Wicket 1.3.x to the new genericized approach built into Wicket 1.4.
> I was hoping that the migration guide at the URL
> http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrate-14.html but unfortunately, the
> information I need to get the Wicket in Action 0.9 example code up and
> running is not in that guide.
> Alas, a March posting on the user list regarding Wicket in Action's support
> for 1.4 which suggested that one should be able to ignore the compiler
> warnings about generics didn't play out -- I'm getting errors, not warnings
> I can ignore.
> The change log for 1.4RC1 consists of a links to JIRA tickets, which
> requires some slogging through many detailed bug reports. When one is is new
> to a software technology, it's hard to see the forest for the trees
> sometimes, and I don't think I have enough experience in Wicket to be able
> to make much sense of a trudge through those bug reports...just yet.
>
> I did locate an old news posting here (
> http://wicket.apache.org/wicket-14-m3-news.html) which covered the
> switchover to a non-genericized Component class. This news item told me how
> to solve the errors I was seeing with Component.[get|set]Model et. al, in
> the Wicket in Action example code, by replacing these calls with
> Component.[get|set]DefaultModel. That's getting me further (and I'm also
> happy to contribute my diffs back to the authors if they are interested).
> Perhaps that snippet can be added to the migration guide now?
>
> But the overall sparseness of the 1.3-1.4 migration guide as of this
> writing, makes me suspicious that there are perhaps some subtleties in the
> migration process that I, as a newbie, will miss. Perhaps there are changes
> I should be making to this example code, even though things are nearly
> compiling, but those changes/best practices are simply are not yet
> documented. These are the kinds of issues that can come back to haunt you if
> you start development with a less-than final release :-(
>
> So perhaps we should be sticking with Wicket 1.3 because the examples and
> documentation is more readily available for a pre-genericized Wicket? And
> also, because there is no date for when the 1.4 final release will be
> available, and things still could change?
>
> Or use Wicket 1.4RC1 and be optimistic that we're close enough to the final
> product, even though the documentation isn't out there yet to support this
> release, and it will be slower going at first?
>
> Any advice for people just starting out?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Susan
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
RE: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
Posted by Stefan Lindner <li...@visionet.de>.
I just can tell you our experience as wicket users. We recently moved a production system from wicket 2.0 (was an alpha version or so) to 1.4RC1. This system is now in production again. It runs as stable as the old one.
We developed two applications with 1.4RC1 (going through M1 to M3) which are in production now for some weeks and we had no problems at all.
So much about stability of wicket 1.4 from a users point of view.
Stefan
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Susan Liebeskind [mailto:susan.liebeskind@gtri.gatech.edu]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 23. November 2008 13:50
An: users@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Stability of Wicket 1.4RC1 methods/interfaces: new development on 1.3.5 or 1.4RC1?
My project team has decided we will go with Wicket to replace our aging
Struts 1.x infrastructure, so we're starting to learn to use Wicket in
earnest. The next question we face is whether to use Wicket 1.3 or
Wicket 1.4.
Since Wicket 1.4 is at RC1, and there is substantial use of generics in
Wicket 1.4, our belief is that it makes sense for use to start out using
Wicket 1.4RC1. The logic is that since the 1.4 release is at RC1,
things are pretty stable and methods/interfaces are not going to change
in any significant way.
Is that a fair assumption to make? For those experienced Wicket
developers on the list, would you recommend starting brand new
development now with Wicket 1.4RC1 or fall back to Wicket 1.3.5?
----
My problem is that I'm trying to work through the examples for Wicket in
Action (version 0.9, available from
http://code.google.com/p/wicketinaction/downloads/list) with my trusty
hardcopy of the book in hand, and translate from what I am reading about
in Wicket 1.3.x to the new genericized approach built into Wicket 1.4.
I was hoping that the migration guide at the URL
http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrate-14.html but unfortunately, the
information I need to get the Wicket in Action 0.9 example code up and
running is not in that guide.
Alas, a March posting on the user list regarding Wicket in Action's
support for 1.4 which suggested that one should be able to ignore the
compiler warnings about generics didn't play out -- I'm getting errors,
not warnings I can ignore.
The change log for 1.4RC1 consists of a links to JIRA tickets, which
requires some slogging through many detailed bug reports. When one is is
new to a software technology, it's hard to see the forest for the trees
sometimes, and I don't think I have enough experience in Wicket to be
able to make much sense of a trudge through those bug reports...just yet.
I did locate an old news posting here
(http://wicket.apache.org/wicket-14-m3-news.html) which covered the
switchover to a non-genericized Component class. This news item told me
how to solve the errors I was seeing with Component.[get|set]Model et.
al, in the Wicket in Action example code, by replacing these calls with
Component.[get|set]DefaultModel. That's getting me further (and I'm
also happy to contribute my diffs back to the authors if they are
interested). Perhaps that snippet can be added to the migration guide now?
But the overall sparseness of the 1.3-1.4 migration guide as of this
writing, makes me suspicious that there are perhaps some subtleties in
the migration process that I, as a newbie, will miss. Perhaps there are
changes I should be making to this example code, even though things are
nearly compiling, but those changes/best practices are simply are not
yet documented. These are the kinds of issues that can come back to
haunt you if you start development with a less-than final release :-(
So perhaps we should be sticking with Wicket 1.3 because the examples
and documentation is more readily available for a pre-genericized
Wicket? And also, because there is no date for when the 1.4 final
release will be available, and things still could change?
Or use Wicket 1.4RC1 and be optimistic that we're close enough to the
final product, even though the documentation isn't out there yet to
support this release, and it will be slower going at first?
Any advice for people just starting out?
Thanks.
Susan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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