You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> on 2006/11/06 23:21:00 UTC
Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Hi,
I know we've been here before, but that was a couple of months ago,
and opinions might have changed by now.
What are your ideas about the /immediate/ roadmap for Wicket 1.3? I'm
interested to learn what the first things will be that people will be
working on when we start 1.3, and/ or what everyone's most important
wishes are for this version.
I'm not totally sure myself, but as Teachscape is nearing production
and a conversion to 2.0 seems unlikely, I'm very interested in
anything that will help it scale better:
* SecondLevelCacheSessionStore
* deferred sessions
* stateless components (forms, links, but basically what we have now in 2.0).
Of course, you opinions make more sense if you are planning on helping
with implementing them, and if you have no real pressing wishes, don't
state them here :)
Eelco
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com>.
That was my personal roadmap :)
On 11/6/06, Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> - Fix license header stuff
> - Synchronize WicketTester with Juergens changes
> - Backport some fixes
> - (2.0 and 1.3) Take a look at WicketTester to get it consistent
> with AJAX generated content.
>
> Frank
>
>
> On 11/6/06, Eelco Hillenius < eelco.hillenius@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I know we've been here before, but that was a couple of months ago,
> > and opinions might have changed by now.
> >
> > What are your ideas about the /immediate/ roadmap for Wicket 1.3? I'm
> > interested to learn what the first things will be that people will be
> > working on when we start 1.3, and/ or what everyone's most important
> > wishes are for this version.
> >
> > I'm not totally sure myself, but as Teachscape is nearing production
> > and a conversion to 2.0 seems unlikely, I'm very interested in
> > anything that will help it scale better:
> >
> > * SecondLevelCacheSessionStore
> > * deferred sessions
> > * stateless components (forms, links, but basically what we have now in
> > 2.0).
> >
> > Of course, you opinions make more sense if you are planning on helping
> > with implementing them, and if you have no real pressing wishes, don't
> > state them here :)
> >
> > Eelco
> >
>
>
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com>.
well, my personal todo then :P
On 11/6/06, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, the license header stuff is not so much a wish as a must-have if
> we want to incubate :).
>
> On 11/6/06, Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > - Fix license header stuff
> > - Synchronize WicketTester with Juergens changes
> > - Backport some fixes
> > - (2.0 and 1.3) Take a look at WicketTester to get it consistent with
> > AJAX generated content.
> >
> > Frank
>
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, the license header stuff is not so much a wish as a must-have if
we want to incubate :).
On 11/6/06, Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Fix license header stuff
> - Synchronize WicketTester with Juergens changes
> - Backport some fixes
> - (2.0 and 1.3) Take a look at WicketTester to get it consistent with
> AJAX generated content.
>
> Frank
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Frank Bille <fr...@gmail.com>.
- Fix license header stuff
- Synchronize WicketTester with Juergens changes
- Backport some fixes
- (2.0 and 1.3) Take a look at WicketTester to get it consistent with
AJAX generated content.
Frank
On 11/6/06, Eelco Hillenius < eelco.hillenius@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I know we've been here before, but that was a couple of months ago,
> and opinions might have changed by now.
>
> What are your ideas about the /immediate/ roadmap for Wicket 1.3? I'm
> interested to learn what the first things will be that people will be
> working on when we start 1.3, and/ or what everyone's most important
> wishes are for this version.
>
> I'm not totally sure myself, but as Teachscape is nearing production
> and a conversion to 2.0 seems unlikely, I'm very interested in
> anything that will help it scale better:
>
> * SecondLevelCacheSessionStore
> * deferred sessions
> * stateless components (forms, links, but basically what we have now in
> 2.0).
>
> Of course, you opinions make more sense if you are planning on helping
> with implementing them, and if you have no real pressing wishes, don't
> state them here :)
>
> Eelco
>
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
> * SecondLevelCacheSessionStore
> * deferred sessions
> * stateless components (forms, links, but basically what we have now in
> 2.0).
those 3 are on my list and i think i will do them as soon as possible (this
week
if 1.x opens up..)
johan
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> all im saying is that it wont really be "backporting" more of a "rewrite"
> without the object param change
OK semantics, semantics ;-)
Martijn
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Cool, thanks Johan!
Eelco
On 11/8/06, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i am already busy and i think almost done with:
>
> second level caching
> stateless pages/components
> delayed session
>
> I just have to figure out if i don't forget anything..
>
> johan
>
>
> On 11/8/06, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think that is a solid idea, but I also want the 1.x branch to follow
> > > 2.x as closely as possible feature wise. This is also nice for those
> > > reading the book that things still work as explained in 1.x.
> > >
> > > Not everything, but having a similar hierarchy for models would help.
> > > Having validators work in similar fashion would help too.
> >
> > Here is where we disagree though. I'm not for keeping 1.x close to 2.0
> > at all. We planned on letting 1.3 be the branch close to 1.2, but with
> > a couple of fixes and enhancements we couldn't do in 1.2 due to binary
> > compatibility. A similar hierarchy for models and validators that work
> > in the same way are in my book not important enough to justify the
> > time we distract from working on 2.0 and for more API breaks. But
> > that's just my opinion. If it's on the top of your list, well, this
> > thread is where you can state that then. I am just hoping that 1.3
> > stays close to 1.2 now (I'm sure the readers of Pro Wicket can
> > appreciate that as well), and that we can put 1.3. in maintenance
> > state very soon too.
> >
> > Eelco
> >
>
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
i am already busy and i think almost done with:
second level caching
stateless pages/components
delayed session
I just have to figure out if i don't forget anything..
johan
On 11/8/06, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think that is a solid idea, but I also want the 1.x branch to follow
> > 2.x as closely as possible feature wise. This is also nice for those
> > reading the book that things still work as explained in 1.x.
> >
> > Not everything, but having a similar hierarchy for models would help.
> > Having validators work in similar fashion would help too.
>
> Here is where we disagree though. I'm not for keeping 1.x close to 2.0
> at all. We planned on letting 1.3 be the branch close to 1.2, but with
> a couple of fixes and enhancements we couldn't do in 1.2 due to binary
> compatibility. A similar hierarchy for models and validators that work
> in the same way are in my book not important enough to justify the
> time we distract from working on 2.0 and for more API breaks. But
> that's just my opinion. If it's on the top of your list, well, this
> thread is where you can state that then. I am just hoping that 1.3
> stays close to 1.2 now (I'm sure the readers of Pro Wicket can
> appreciate that as well), and that we can put 1.3. in maintenance
> state very soon too.
>
> Eelco
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
> I think that is a solid idea, but I also want the 1.x branch to follow
> 2.x as closely as possible feature wise. This is also nice for those
> reading the book that things still work as explained in 1.x.
>
> Not everything, but having a similar hierarchy for models would help.
> Having validators work in similar fashion would help too.
Here is where we disagree though. I'm not for keeping 1.x close to 2.0
at all. We planned on letting 1.3 be the branch close to 1.2, but with
a couple of fixes and enhancements we couldn't do in 1.2 due to binary
compatibility. A similar hierarchy for models and validators that work
in the same way are in my book not important enough to justify the
time we distract from working on 2.0 and for more API breaks. But
that's just my opinion. If it's on the top of your list, well, this
thread is where you can state that then. I am just hoping that 1.3
stays close to 1.2 now (I'm sure the readers of Pro Wicket can
appreciate that as well), and that we can put 1.3. in maintenance
state very soon too.
Eelco
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/8/06, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's why I wanted to know about what people thought were the /most
> important/ issues. I'd like to keep close to the idea of only having a
> few minimal API changes, and I also think it is a good idea to keep
> focussed on 2.0 as the main area of development now.
I think that is a solid idea, but I also want the 1.x branch to follow
2.x as closely as possible feature wise. This is also nice for those
reading the book that things still work as explained in 1.x.
Not everything, but having a similar hierarchy for models would help.
Having validators work in similar fashion would help too.
Martijn
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
That's why I wanted to know about what people thought were the /most
important/ issues. I'd like to keep close to the idea of only having a
few minimal API changes, and I also think it is a good idea to keep
focussed on 2.0 as the main area of development now.
Eelco
On 11/8/06, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah if we start rewriting that also then 1.3 will pretty much be
> 2.0without constructor change??
> are we really planning to backport/rewrite all that?
>
> johan
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
> "undo" the constructor change and generics :)
Go ahead Matej!
Removing all the MainContainer parent from all the constructors is easy
Just fine a good find and replace script.. ;)
Then you still have about 10 hours straight work to fix everything..
But the result is of course perfect!
johan
P.S. don't forget to rollback the changes that we have now because we have
the constructor change then..
:)
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Erik van Oosten <e....@chello.nl>.
If you're going that far, why not keep that too?
Then Wicket 1.3 would simply be a Java 1.4 port of Wicket 2.0 :)
(Okay okay, you'll loose backward compatibility.)
Erik.
Matej Knopp schreef:
> Yeah... Slowly I start to think that it would be less work to branch
> trunk and "undo" the constructor change and generics :)
>
> -Matej
--
Erik van Oosten
http://www.day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Matej Knopp <ma...@knopp.sk>.
Yeah... Slowly I start to think that it would be less work to branch
trunk and "undo" the constructor change and generics :)
-Matej
Johan Compagner wrote:
> yeah if we start rewriting that also then 1.3 will pretty much be
> 2.0without constructor change??
> are we really planning to backport/rewrite all that?
>
> johan
>
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> all im saying is that it wont really be "backporting" more of a "rewrite"
>> without the object param change
>>
>> -igor
>>
>>
>> On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > There is... I profiled our app, and creating a flat model hierarchy
>> > can save quite some memory. Every layer of inheritance adds a
>> > reference to the super type, and takes 4 bytes (see the LDM thread for
>> > more information).
>> >
>> > Saving this on the models gives extra room in mem usage. Same would go
>> > for components, but there the difference in functionality is larger,
>> > and there are much more types.
>> >
>> > Even so, I'm not sure that the removal of the object parameter was the
>> > only idea behind the flattening, it makes the hierarchy much cleaner.
>> >
>> > Martijn
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
>> > >
>> > > all that was done as part of removing the object param so without
>> that
>> > there
>> > > is no point in backporting.
>> > >
>> > > -igor
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i
>> remember
>> > > > every
>> > > > > refactor i do?
>> > > >
>> > > > Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the
>> same
>> > > > for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
>> > > >
>> > > > > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don
>> > tknow
>> > > > if we
>> > > > > want to do that in 1.x branch
>> > > >
>> > > > We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is
>> something
>> > > > that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
>> > > > moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
>> > > >
>> > > > Martijn
>> > > >
>> > > > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however.
>> And
>> > > > > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is
>> equivalent
>> > with
>> > > > > > 2.0
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Martijn
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > -igor
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
>> > > > > > > > > whats that?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to
>> 1.3
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Martijn
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > <a href="
>> http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
>> > > > > > ">Vote</a>
>> > > > > > > > for <a href="
>> > http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
>> > > > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
>> > > > > > > > at the <a
>> href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best
>> > Stuff
>> > > > in
>> > > > > > > > the World!</a>
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
>> > > > ">Vote</a>
>> > > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
>> > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
>> > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best
>> Stuff
>> > in
>> > > > > > the World!</a>
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
>> > ">Vote</a>
>> > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
>> > > > ">Wicket</a>
>> > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
>> in
>> > > > the World!</a>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > <a
>> href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
>> > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
>> > ">Wicket</a>
>> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
>> > the World!</a>
>> >
>>
>>
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
yeah if we start rewriting that also then 1.3 will pretty much be
2.0without constructor change??
are we really planning to backport/rewrite all that?
johan
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> all im saying is that it wont really be "backporting" more of a "rewrite"
> without the object param change
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There is... I profiled our app, and creating a flat model hierarchy
> > can save quite some memory. Every layer of inheritance adds a
> > reference to the super type, and takes 4 bytes (see the LDM thread for
> > more information).
> >
> > Saving this on the models gives extra room in mem usage. Same would go
> > for components, but there the difference in functionality is larger,
> > and there are much more types.
> >
> > Even so, I'm not sure that the removal of the object parameter was the
> > only idea behind the flattening, it makes the hierarchy much cleaner.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
> > >
> > > all that was done as part of removing the object param so without that
> > there
> > > is no point in backporting.
> > >
> > > -igor
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i
> remember
> > > > every
> > > > > refactor i do?
> > > >
> > > > Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
> > > > for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
> > > >
> > > > > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don
> > tknow
> > > > if we
> > > > > want to do that in 1.x branch
> > > >
> > > > We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
> > > > that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
> > > > moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
> > > >
> > > > Martijn
> > > >
> > > > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however.
> And
> > > > > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is
> equivalent
> > with
> > > > > > 2.0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martijn
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -igor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > > > > > whats that?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to
> 1.3
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martijn
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > <a href="
> http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > > > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > > > > for <a href="
> > http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best
> > Stuff
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best
> Stuff
> > in
> > > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > ">Vote</a>
> > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
> in
> > > > the World!</a>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > ">Wicket</a>
> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > the World!</a>
> >
>
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
all im saying is that it wont really be "backporting" more of a "rewrite"
without the object param change
-igor
On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is... I profiled our app, and creating a flat model hierarchy
> can save quite some memory. Every layer of inheritance adds a
> reference to the super type, and takes 4 bytes (see the LDM thread for
> more information).
>
> Saving this on the models gives extra room in mem usage. Same would go
> for components, but there the difference in functionality is larger,
> and there are much more types.
>
> Even so, I'm not sure that the removal of the object parameter was the
> only idea behind the flattening, it makes the hierarchy much cleaner.
>
> Martijn
>
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
> >
> > all that was done as part of removing the object param so without that
> there
> > is no point in backporting.
> >
> > -igor
> >
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember
> > > every
> > > > refactor i do?
> > >
> > > Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
> > > for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
> > >
> > > > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don
> tknow
> > > if we
> > > > want to do that in 1.x branch
> > >
> > > We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
> > > that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
> > > moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
> > >
> > > Martijn
> > >
> > > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> > > > >
> > > > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> > > > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent
> with
> > > > > 2.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Martijn
> > > > >
> > > > > > -igor
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > > > > whats that?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martijn
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > > > for <a href="
> http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best
> Stuff
> > > in
> > > > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
> in
> > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> ">Vote</a>
> > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > the World!</a>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> ">Wicket</a>
> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> the World!</a>
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
LDM thread is:
http://www.nabble.com/LoadableDetachableModel%3A-remove-boolean-attached-tf2553764.html
On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is... I profiled our app, and creating a flat model hierarchy
> can save quite some memory. Every layer of inheritance adds a
> reference to the super type, and takes 4 bytes (see the LDM thread for
> more information).
>
> Saving this on the models gives extra room in mem usage. Same would go
> for components, but there the difference in functionality is larger,
> and there are much more types.
>
> Even so, I'm not sure that the removal of the object parameter was the
> only idea behind the flattening, it makes the hierarchy much cleaner.
>
> Martijn
>
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
> >
> > all that was done as part of removing the object param so without that there
> > is no point in backporting.
> >
> > -igor
> >
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember
> > > every
> > > > refactor i do?
> > >
> > > Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
> > > for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
> > >
> > > > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don tknow
> > > if we
> > > > want to do that in 1.x branch
> > >
> > > We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
> > > that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
> > > moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
> > >
> > > Martijn
> > >
> > > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> > > > >
> > > > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> > > > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
> > > > > 2.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Martijn
> > > > >
> > > > > > -igor
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > > > > whats that?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martijn
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
> > > in
> > > > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > the World!</a>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> the World!</a>
>
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
There is... I profiled our app, and creating a flat model hierarchy
can save quite some memory. Every layer of inheritance adds a
reference to the super type, and takes 4 bytes (see the LDM thread for
more information).
Saving this on the models gives extra room in mem usage. Same would go
for components, but there the difference in functionality is larger,
and there are much more types.
Even so, I'm not sure that the removal of the object parameter was the
only idea behind the flattening, it makes the hierarchy much cleaner.
Martijn
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
>
> all that was done as part of removing the object param so without that there
> is no point in backporting.
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember
> > every
> > > refactor i do?
> >
> > Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
> > for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
> >
> > > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don tknow
> > if we
> > > want to do that in 1.x branch
> >
> > We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
> > that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
> > moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> > > >
> > > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> > > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
> > > > 2.0
> > > >
> > > > Martijn
> > > >
> > > > > -igor
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > > > whats that?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martijn
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
> > in
> > > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > ">Vote</a>
> > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > > the World!</a>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > ">Wicket</a>
> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > the World!</a>
> >
>
>
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
you mean things like removing the abstract compound model, etc?
all that was done as part of removing the object param so without that there
is no point in backporting.
-igor
On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember
> every
> > refactor i do?
>
> Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
> for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
>
> > removing object will really break everything out there, so i don tknow
> if we
> > want to do that in 1.x branch
>
> We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
> that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
> moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
>
> Martijn
>
> > On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> > >
> > > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> > > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
> > > 2.0
> > >
> > > Martijn
> > >
> > > > -igor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > > whats that?
> > > > >
> > > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > > > >
> > > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > > >
> > > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > > >
> > > > > Martijn
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > > ">Vote</a>
> > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff
> in
> > > > > the World!</a>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> ">Vote</a>
> > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > the World!</a>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> ">Wicket</a>
> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> the World!</a>
>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember every
> refactor i do?
Press f4 on IModel in eclipse in your 2.x workspace, and do the same
for the 1.x workspace. Notice the differences in hierarchy.
> removing object will really break everything out there, so i don tknow if we
> want to do that in 1.x branch
We could make it a vote... But I share your concern. It is something
that existing users need to vote on I guess. For them it will make
moving to 2.0 a bit easier.
Martijn
> On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > you mean the removal of the object param?
> >
> > That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> > further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
> > 2.0
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > > -igor
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > > whats that?
> > > >
> > > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > > >
> > > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > > >
> > > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > > >
> > > > Martijn
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> > ">Vote</a>
> > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > > the World!</a>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > ">Wicket</a>
> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > the World!</a>
> >
>
>
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i need some concrete examples here martijn! :) you think i remember every
refactor i do?
removing object will really break everything out there, so i don tknow if we
want to do that in 1.x branch
-igor
On 11/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > you mean the removal of the object param?
>
> That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
> further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
> 2.0
>
> Martijn
>
> > -igor
> >
> >
> > On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > > whats that?
> > >
> > > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> > >
> > > i.e. collapsing of models.
> > >
> > > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> > >
> > > Martijn
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket
> ">Vote</a>
> > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > > ">Wicket</a>
> > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > > the World!</a>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> ">Wicket</a>
> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> the World!</a>
>
Re: Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> you mean the removal of the object param?
That would be cool too. Not sure if that is possible, however. And
further mostly flattening the hierarchy, so that it is equivalent with
2.0
Martijn
> -igor
>
>
> On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > > whats that?
> >
> > The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
> >
> > i.e. collapsing of models.
> >
> > You did it, don't you remember? :D
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> >
> > --
> > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> > ">Wicket</a>
> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> > the World!</a>
> >
>
>
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
you mean the removal of the object param?
-igor
On 11/6/06, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> > whats that?
>
> The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
>
> i.e. collapsing of models.
>
> You did it, don't you remember? :D
>
> Martijn
>
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket
> ">Wicket</a>
> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
> the World!</a>
>
Re: Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > * IModel hierarchy improvements
> whats that?
The simplifications in IModel hierarchy of 2.0 applied to 1.3
i.e. collapsing of models.
You did it, don't you remember? :D
Martijn
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
>
> * IModel hierarchy improvements
>
whats that?
-igor
Re: Short term road map for Wicket 1.3
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 11/6/06, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> * SecondLevelCacheSessionStore
> * deferred sessions
> * stateless components (forms, links, but basically what we have now in 2.0).
+1 on all, and add:
* nested forms
* validator changes
* IModel hierarchy improvements
* API clean up ([re]move RequiredTextField?)
* reference guide
Martijn
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket">Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket">Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/">Best Stuff in
the World!</a>