You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> on 2013/06/26 13:20:39 UTC
Wicket 7 status
Hi all,
I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
At the moment there are just
3<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
tickets
with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
In the roadmap page there is also:
Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
components<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents.>
-
@Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
details how you imagine the new way.
Make CSS class strings used in the framework
configurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
-
this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
(unless someone else does it before me).
I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
(MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
release candidate.
I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
Sarman for their help so far!
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i may be able to help here. ive recently written a descent polling
panel we use to execute long-running sql queries. its not async in the
sense that it does not work via servlet 3 async requests - it polls
with ajax. but, unlike lazyloadpanel we have now this one doesnt block
access to the page, and has some rudimentary job management. i will
see if i can open source it...
-igor
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Nick Pratt <nb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you're asking what else could go in, better async support for long
> running tasks would be a great addition - perhaps some simple job
> management. There are a couple of examples out on the web, and we built
> our own a while back, but Id rather the framework provided such support
> (with associated front end updates / notifications on job completion)
>
> N
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>>
>> At the moment there are just
>> 3<
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
>> >
>> tickets
>> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>>
>> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
>> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>>
>> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
>> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>>
>> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
>> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
>> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>>
>>
>> In the roadmap page there is also:
>>
>> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
>> components<
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
>> .>
>> -
>> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
>> details how you imagine the new way.
>>
>> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
>> configurable<
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
>> >
>> -
>> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
>> (unless someone else does it before me).
>>
>> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
>> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
>> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>>
>> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
>> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
>> release candidate.
>>
>> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
>> Sarman for their help so far!
>>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Nick Pratt <nb...@gmail.com>.
If you're asking what else could go in, better async support for long
running tasks would be a great addition - perhaps some simple job
management. There are a couple of examples out on the web, and we built
our own a while back, but Id rather the framework provided such support
(with associated front end updates / notifications on job completion)
N
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>
> At the moment there are just
> 3<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> >
> tickets
> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>
> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>
> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>
>
> In the roadmap page there is also:
>
> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> components<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> .>
> -
> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> details how you imagine the new way.
>
> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> configurable<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> >
> -
> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> (unless someone else does it before me).
>
> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>
> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
> release candidate.
>
> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> Sarman for their help so far!
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Bertrand Guay-Paquet <be...@step.polymtl.ca>.
Hello,
I know this is not on the roadmap right now, but I wanted to bring up
one feature from the wishlist which I recently updated. From the wiki:
Better stateless support
add more stateless components (stateless versions of existing
components)
adopt Ajax stateless behaviors (allow stateless ajax behavior
listeners)
...
In Wicket 6, any behavior implementing IBehaviorListener becomes
stateful. This includes all subclasses of AbstractAjaxBehavior.
Overriding this behavior by making getStatelessHint() return true for an
ajax behavior with a listener interface is tricky. The listener's url
cannot be assumed to be stable unless the number and order of behaviors
added to components does not change between the page creation and the
ajax request.
Now, some background. Recently, I've built a mechanism for building
"guided tours" of my website. It's essentially a server-side version of
http://bootstraptour.com/ which localizes the content and handles
navigating from one Wicket page to another during the tour. My approach
was to "inject" an ajax behavior (with next, prev links) to a page when
it is part of a currently active tour. This behavior takes care of
rendering the popovers and handling the tour navigation ajax callbacks.
I use an IComponentInstantiationListener which checks if the current
page is part of a tour and adds the ajax behavior.
This works very well, but a stateless page which is part of a tour
automatically becomes stateful when adding the behavior. Also, consider
a component on a site's front page which loads the latest 5 entries from
a database (think message board) and refreshes itself every 10 seconds.
To keep the page stateless, which is desirable I believe in many cases,
you'd have to use another mechanism (json resource with hand-built html
to display it, etc.) but you could not use only Wicket components and
behaviors.
I understand that perhaps no one is available or interested to work on
the "stateless ajax" issue. I also know that it is not trivial at all,
especially when we consider component replacement in pages. I simply
wanted to restate that this type of feature could be major for Wicket.
There have been many posts on the mailing list regarding stateless pages
and ajax.
Regards,
Bertrand
On 26/06/2013 7:20 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>
> At the moment there are just
> 3<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
> tickets
> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>
> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>
> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>
>
> In the roadmap page there is also:
>
> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> components<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents.>
> -
> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> details how you imagine the new way.
>
> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> configurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
> -
> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> (unless someone else does it before me).
>
> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>
> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
> release candidate.
>
> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> Sarman for their help so far!
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Cedric Gatay <ga...@gmail.com>.
TurboLinks looks really cool, I think it could be a nice thing to have in
Wicket for applications targeting recent web browsers.
__
Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>)
http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info | http://cedric.gatay.fr
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes <
> adrianosf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Has anyone thought (or even known about) the knockoutjs library?
>
>
> > I'm impressed with it, and I'm integrating it with our application (that
> > integration means less wicket usage).
> >
>
> Some of the developers in Lift Web Framework were also impressed by it. Now
> they are more impressed from AngularJs/EmberJs/youNameItJs.
> Few years ago everyone wrote his own Java web framework, now it is the same
> but they use JavaScript :-)
>
>
> >
> > I'm wondering if someone has plans to do a good integration with Wicket
> > components, where instead of add components to AJAX targets, only
> > Javascript model objects would be changed and the controls would just
> > repaint themselves.
> >
>
> AjaxRequestTarget.appendJavaScript() ?!
>
>
> >
> >
> > Adriano
> >
> >
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes <
adrianosf@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone thought (or even known about) the knockoutjs library?
> I'm impressed with it, and I'm integrating it with our application (that
> integration means less wicket usage).
>
Some of the developers in Lift Web Framework were also impressed by it. Now
they are more impressed from AngularJs/EmberJs/youNameItJs.
Few years ago everyone wrote his own Java web framework, now it is the same
but they use JavaScript :-)
>
> I'm wondering if someone has plans to do a good integration with Wicket
> components, where instead of add components to AJAX targets, only
> Javascript model objects would be changed and the controls would just
> repaint themselves.
>
AjaxRequestTarget.appendJavaScript() ?!
>
>
> Adriano
>
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Adriano dos Santos Fernandes <ad...@gmail.com>.
Has anyone thought (or even known about) the knockoutjs library?
I'm impressed with it, and I'm integrating it with our application (that
integration means less wicket usage).
I'm wondering if someone has plans to do a good integration with Wicket
components, where instead of add components to AJAX targets, only
Javascript model objects would be changed and the controls would just
repaint themselves.
Adriano
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd still like to give a go at "turbo links" [1] out of the box. We
> also need to move some experimental modules to official ones IMO. A
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Votewhichexperimentalmodulesshouldbecomestable
> decision on the future of wicket-bootstrap:experimental needs to be
> made.
>
> Unfortunately I'm not currently working on a project that makes it
> possible to develop turbolinks on the job, and my evening hours are
> such intermittent that I can't fathom conceiving such a major feature.
>
> Martijn
>
> [1] https://github.com/rails/turbolinks/
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> >
> > At the moment there are just
> > 3<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> >
> > tickets
> > with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> >
> > One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> > adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> >
> > Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> > CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
> >
> > And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> > about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> > solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> >
> >
> > In the roadmap page there is also:
> >
> > Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> > components<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> .>
> > -
> > @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> > details how you imagine the new way.
> >
> > Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> > configurable<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> >
> > -
> > this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> > (unless someone else does it before me).
> >
> > I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> > (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> > handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> >
> > Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think
> we
> > are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone
> or
> > release candidate.
> >
> > I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> > Sarman for their help so far!
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
I'd still like to give a go at "turbo links" [1] out of the box. We
also need to move some experimental modules to official ones IMO. A
decision on the future of wicket-bootstrap:experimental needs to be
made.
Unfortunately I'm not currently working on a project that makes it
possible to develop turbolinks on the job, and my evening hours are
such intermittent that I can't fathom conceiving such a major feature.
Martijn
[1] https://github.com/rails/turbolinks/
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>
> At the moment there are just
> 3<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
> tickets
> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>
> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>
> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>
>
> In the roadmap page there is also:
>
> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> components<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents.>
> -
> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> details how you imagine the new way.
>
> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> configurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
> -
> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> (unless someone else does it before me).
>
> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>
> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
> release candidate.
>
> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> Sarman for their help so far!
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by John Sarman <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> >
> > At the moment there are just
> > 3<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> >
> > tickets
> > with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> >
> > One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> > adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> >
> > Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> > CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> i havent had time to keep up with this, be sure we do not lock
> ourselves into weld...
It is split into wicket-cdi-1.1-core and wicket-cdi-1.1-weld.
> > And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> > about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> > solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> >
> >
> > In the roadmap page there is also:
> >
> > Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> > components<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> .>
> > -
> > @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> > details how you imagine the new way.
>
> im fine with someone else taking this one. the basic idea is to make
> CheckGroup and RadioGroup non-components because in a lot of cases it
> is inconvenient to have them wrap some sections. eg when you have two
> check groups you have to put one inside the other, which is
> non-intuitive. so the groups are linked by the instance of CheckGroup
> and RadioGroup objects which can take care of generating unique ids,
> etc.
>
> so instead of code like this:
>
> RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> add(group);
> group.add(new Radio());
>
> we would have
>
> RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> add(new Radio("id", group));
>
> makes sense?
>
> -igor
>
>
>
> >
> > Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> > configurable<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> >
> > -
> > this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> > (unless someone else does it before me).
> >
> > I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> > (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> > handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> >
> > Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think
> we
> > are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone
> or
> > release candidate.
> >
> > I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> > Sarman for their help so far!
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hi,
About stateless ajax behaviors - the Jolira components and behaviors have
been moved to WicketStuff (
https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/tree/master/jdk-1.6-parent/stateless-parent)
since two releases. There were two Pull Requests already.
Use them, extend them, polish them and at some point we may vote to merge
them in Apache Wicket ;-)
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Cedric Gatay <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I second what Bertrand said. I think having more statelessness in core
> Wicket ajax. I think this is the way to go since it eases deployment of
> "large" instance of our applications. However there is a big pile of work
> for this, so if Wicket 7 is said to be released soon, I guess we'd better
> postpone this.
>
> PS : glad to help, and willing to help more ;)
>
> Regards,
>
> __
> Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>)
> http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info |
> http://cedric.gatay.fr
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynberg@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> > >
> > > At the moment there are just
> > > 3<
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> > >
> > > tickets
> > > with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> > >
> > > One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is
> about
> > > adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> > >
> > > Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> > > CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
> >
> > i havent had time to keep up with this, be sure we do not lock
> > ourselves into weld...
> >
> > > And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one
> is
> > > about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> > > solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> > >
> > >
> > > In the roadmap page there is also:
> > >
> > > Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> > > components<
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> > .>
> > > -
> > > @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give
> more
> > > details how you imagine the new way.
> >
> > im fine with someone else taking this one. the basic idea is to make
> > CheckGroup and RadioGroup non-components because in a lot of cases it
> > is inconvenient to have them wrap some sections. eg when you have two
> > check groups you have to put one inside the other, which is
> > non-intuitive. so the groups are linked by the instance of CheckGroup
> > and RadioGroup objects which can take care of generating unique ids,
> > etc.
> >
> > so instead of code like this:
> >
> > RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> > add(group);
> > group.add(new Radio());
> >
> > we would have
> >
> > RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> > add(new Radio("id", group));
> >
> > makes sense?
> >
> > -igor
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> > > configurable<
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> > >
> > > -
> > > this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> > > (unless someone else does it before me).
> > >
> > > I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> > > (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and
> their
> > > handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> > >
> > > Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think
> > we
> > > are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a
> milestone
> > or
> > > release candidate.
> > >
> > > I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and
> John
> > > Sarman for their help so far!
> >
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Cedric Gatay <ga...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I second what Bertrand said. I think having more statelessness in core
Wicket ajax. I think this is the way to go since it eases deployment of
"large" instance of our applications. However there is a big pile of work
for this, so if Wicket 7 is said to be released soon, I guess we'd better
postpone this.
PS : glad to help, and willing to help more ;)
Regards,
__
Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>)
http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info | http://cedric.gatay.fr
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> >
> > At the moment there are just
> > 3<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> >
> > tickets
> > with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> >
> > One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> > adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> >
> > Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> > CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> i havent had time to keep up with this, be sure we do not lock
> ourselves into weld...
>
> > And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> > about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> > solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> >
> >
> > In the roadmap page there is also:
> >
> > Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> > components<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> .>
> > -
> > @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> > details how you imagine the new way.
>
> im fine with someone else taking this one. the basic idea is to make
> CheckGroup and RadioGroup non-components because in a lot of cases it
> is inconvenient to have them wrap some sections. eg when you have two
> check groups you have to put one inside the other, which is
> non-intuitive. so the groups are linked by the instance of CheckGroup
> and RadioGroup objects which can take care of generating unique ids,
> etc.
>
> so instead of code like this:
>
> RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> add(group);
> group.add(new Radio());
>
> we would have
>
> RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
> add(new Radio("id", group));
>
> makes sense?
>
> -igor
>
>
>
> >
> > Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> > configurable<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> >
> > -
> > this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> > (unless someone else does it before me).
> >
> > I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> > (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> > handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> >
> > Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think
> we
> > are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone
> or
> > release candidate.
> >
> > I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> > Sarman for their help so far!
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>
> At the moment there are just
> 3<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
> tickets
> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>
> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>
> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
i havent had time to keep up with this, be sure we do not lock
ourselves into weld...
> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>
>
> In the roadmap page there is also:
>
> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> components<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents.>
> -
> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> details how you imagine the new way.
im fine with someone else taking this one. the basic idea is to make
CheckGroup and RadioGroup non-components because in a lot of cases it
is inconvenient to have them wrap some sections. eg when you have two
check groups you have to put one inside the other, which is
non-intuitive. so the groups are linked by the instance of CheckGroup
and RadioGroup objects which can take care of generating unique ids,
etc.
so instead of code like this:
RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
add(group);
group.add(new Radio());
we would have
RadioGroup group=new RadioGroup();
add(new Radio("id", group));
makes sense?
-igor
>
> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> configurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
> -
> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> (unless someone else does it before me).
>
> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>
> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
> release candidate.
>
> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> Sarman for their help so far!
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Sebastien <se...@gmail.com>.
Hi Martin,
Thanks very much for this answer. Well then, in my own point of view,
that's fine like you described...
Best regards,
Sebastien.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Let's talk with numbers, well dates.
>
> 1.5.0 is announced at Sep 7 2011.
> 6.0.0 is announced at Sep 5 2012.
>
> In my first mail in this thread I said "feature complete, so let's release
> a milestone/rc".
> Summer holidays come so I think the final release won't be in the next
> month or two.
> It took 8 months for 1.5 (RC1 - Jan 22 2011) and 5 months for 6.0 (beta1 -
> Mar 26 2012) to be in RC stage.
>
> There is a difference than 1.5/6.0 - in 7.0 there are no big refactorings
> which will make the migration and testing hard for apps coming from 6.x.
> Additionally I can say that the migration
> guide<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migration+to+Wicket+7.0
> >
> has
> never been so complete.
>
> So a major release has 2 years life. Actually even more because 1.5.x will
> be supported until 7.0.3/4 before be moved to security maintenance mode. At
> least this has been the case with the previous releases.
> Additionally I think it is OK to be supported even more if a core developer
> volunteers to do this, because he has a client or another reason. If Sven
> (or anyone else who can make a release) wants to add a fix to 1.3.x branch
> and release it then all is fine.
>
> In summary - no, there are no new big features in Wicket 7. There are minor
> API improvements/breaks here and there, and requirements for Java 7 and
> Servlet 3.0. But I think we should keep our pace and release a new major
> release once per year. Postponing 7.0 will only increase the changes in the
> APIs and make the migration more painful for our users.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Sebastien <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am in the same case where my customer also did not yet migrate to
> wicket
> > 6... So, in my user point of view, I agree with Sven, I think that one
> > major release by year is enough...
> > Sure, It does not prevent to start working on the next feature(s) and
> > release some betas once one of these is implemented...
> >
> > My 2cts,
> > Sebastien.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Sven Meier <sv...@meiers.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > if we continue to release a major version every 9 months, we will
> either
> > > have to support more branches or drop support for an old version every
> 9
> > > months.
> > > For my type of customers this scenario sounds scary. Some of them just
> > > managed to migrate to Wicket 6 :(.
> > >
> > > So do we really want to publish a new release so soon? Is there
> something
> > > important (already) in Wicket 7 that people are waiting for?
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Sven
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 06/26/2013 01:20 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> > >>
> > >> At the moment there are just
> > >> 3<https://issues.apache.org/**jira/issues/?jql=project%20%**
> > >> 3D%20WICKET%20AND%**20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%**
> > >> 22%20AND%20status%20in%20(**Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%**
> > >> 2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%**20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%**20ASC<
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> > >
> > >> >
> > >> tickets
> > >> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> > >>
> > >> One <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5172<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172>>
> > >> of them is about
> > >> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> > >>
> > >> Another <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-4951<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951>>
> > >> is about
> > >> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
> > >>
> > >> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5184<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184>>
> > >> one is
> > >> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> > >> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> In the roadmap page there is also:
> > >>
> > >> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> > >> components<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
> > >> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**Refactorcheckgroup%**
> > >> 2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncompo**nents<
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> > >
> > >> .>
> > >> -
> > >> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give
> more
> > >> details how you imagine the new way.
> > >>
> > >> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> > >> configurable<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
> > >> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**
> > >> Makecssclassstringsusedinthefr**ameworkconfigurable<
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> > >
> > >> >
> > >> -
> > >> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> > >> (unless someone else does it before me).
> > >>
> > >> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> > >> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and
> their
> > >> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> > >>
> > >> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I
> think
> > we
> > >> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a
> milestone
> > >> or
> > >> release candidate.
> > >>
> > >> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and
> > John
> > >> Sarman for their help so far!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hey,
Let's talk with numbers, well dates.
1.5.0 is announced at Sep 7 2011.
6.0.0 is announced at Sep 5 2012.
In my first mail in this thread I said "feature complete, so let's release
a milestone/rc".
Summer holidays come so I think the final release won't be in the next
month or two.
It took 8 months for 1.5 (RC1 - Jan 22 2011) and 5 months for 6.0 (beta1 -
Mar 26 2012) to be in RC stage.
There is a difference than 1.5/6.0 - in 7.0 there are no big refactorings
which will make the migration and testing hard for apps coming from 6.x.
Additionally I can say that the migration
guide<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migration+to+Wicket+7.0>
has
never been so complete.
So a major release has 2 years life. Actually even more because 1.5.x will
be supported until 7.0.3/4 before be moved to security maintenance mode. At
least this has been the case with the previous releases.
Additionally I think it is OK to be supported even more if a core developer
volunteers to do this, because he has a client or another reason. If Sven
(or anyone else who can make a release) wants to add a fix to 1.3.x branch
and release it then all is fine.
In summary - no, there are no new big features in Wicket 7. There are minor
API improvements/breaks here and there, and requirements for Java 7 and
Servlet 3.0. But I think we should keep our pace and release a new major
release once per year. Postponing 7.0 will only increase the changes in the
APIs and make the migration more painful for our users.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Sebastien <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am in the same case where my customer also did not yet migrate to wicket
> 6... So, in my user point of view, I agree with Sven, I think that one
> major release by year is enough...
> Sure, It does not prevent to start working on the next feature(s) and
> release some betas once one of these is implemented...
>
> My 2cts,
> Sebastien.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Sven Meier <sv...@meiers.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > if we continue to release a major version every 9 months, we will either
> > have to support more branches or drop support for an old version every 9
> > months.
> > For my type of customers this scenario sounds scary. Some of them just
> > managed to migrate to Wicket 6 :(.
> >
> > So do we really want to publish a new release so soon? Is there something
> > important (already) in Wicket 7 that people are waiting for?
> >
> > Best regards
> > Sven
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/26/2013 01:20 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
> >>
> >> At the moment there are just
> >> 3<https://issues.apache.org/**jira/issues/?jql=project%20%**
> >> 3D%20WICKET%20AND%**20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%**
> >> 22%20AND%20status%20in%20(**Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%**
> >> 2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%**20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%**20ASC<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC
> >
> >> >
> >> tickets
> >> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
> >>
> >> One <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5172<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172>>
> >> of them is about
> >> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
> >>
> >> Another <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-4951<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951>>
> >> is about
> >> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
> >>
> >> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5184<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184>>
> >> one is
> >> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> >> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
> >>
> >>
> >> In the roadmap page there is also:
> >>
> >> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> >> components<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
> >> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**Refactorcheckgroup%**
> >> 2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncompo**nents<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents
> >
> >> .>
> >> -
> >> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> >> details how you imagine the new way.
> >>
> >> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> >> configurable<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
> >> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**
> >> Makecssclassstringsusedinthefr**ameworkconfigurable<
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable
> >
> >> >
> >> -
> >> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> >> (unless someone else does it before me).
> >>
> >> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> >> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> >> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
> >>
> >> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think
> we
> >> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone
> >> or
> >> release candidate.
> >>
> >> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and
> John
> >> Sarman for their help so far!
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Sebastien <se...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
I am in the same case where my customer also did not yet migrate to wicket
6... So, in my user point of view, I agree with Sven, I think that one
major release by year is enough...
Sure, It does not prevent to start working on the next feature(s) and
release some betas once one of these is implemented...
My 2cts,
Sebastien.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Sven Meier <sv...@meiers.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> if we continue to release a major version every 9 months, we will either
> have to support more branches or drop support for an old version every 9
> months.
> For my type of customers this scenario sounds scary. Some of them just
> managed to migrate to Wicket 6 :(.
>
> So do we really want to publish a new release so soon? Is there something
> important (already) in Wicket 7 that people are waiting for?
>
> Best regards
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 06/26/2013 01:20 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>>
>> At the moment there are just
>> 3<https://issues.apache.org/**jira/issues/?jql=project%20%**
>> 3D%20WICKET%20AND%**20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%**
>> 22%20AND%20status%20in%20(**Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%**
>> 2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%**20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%**20ASC<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
>> >
>> tickets
>> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>>
>> One <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5172<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172>>
>> of them is about
>> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>>
>> Another <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-4951<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951>>
>> is about
>> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>>
>> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/WICKET-5184<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184>>
>> one is
>> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
>> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>>
>>
>> In the roadmap page there is also:
>>
>> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
>> components<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
>> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**Refactorcheckgroup%**
>> 2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncompo**nents<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents>
>> .>
>> -
>> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
>> details how you imagine the new way.
>>
>> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
>> configurable<https://cwiki.**apache.org/confluence/display/**
>> WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#**Wicket7.0Roadmap-**
>> Makecssclassstringsusedinthefr**ameworkconfigurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
>> >
>> -
>> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
>> (unless someone else does it before me).
>>
>> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
>> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
>> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>>
>> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
>> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone
>> or
>> release candidate.
>>
>> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
>> Sarman for their help so far!
>>
>>
>
Re: Wicket 7 status
Posted by Sven Meier <sv...@meiers.net>.
Hi all,
if we continue to release a major version every 9 months, we will either
have to support more branches or drop support for an old version every 9
months.
For my type of customers this scenario sounds scary. Some of them just
managed to migrate to Wicket 6 :(.
So do we really want to publish a new release so soon? Is there
something important (already) in Wicket 7 that people are waiting for?
Best regards
Sven
On 06/26/2013 01:20 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss where we are with Wicket 7 and what to do next.
>
> At the moment there are just
> 3<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WICKET%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%227.0.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC%2C%20summary%20ASC>
> tickets
> with "Fix Version" 7.0.0.
>
> One <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5172> of them is about
> adding a link for the javadoc at http://wicket.apache.org. Trivial.
>
> Another <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4951> is about
> CDI-1.1. John Sarman is helping here. Thanks!
>
> And the last <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5184> one is
> about the signature of AbstractTree/Model.ofSet(). I don't see a good
> solution here, but I have provided a workaround.
>
>
> In the roadmap page there is also:
>
> Refactor checkgroup/radiogroup to make them non
> components<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Refactorcheckgroup%2Fradiogrouptomakethemnoncomponents.>
> -
> @Igor: do you want to work yourself on this ? Otherwise please give more
> details how you imagine the new way.
>
> Make CSS class strings used in the framework
> configurable<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wicket+7.0+Roadmap#Wicket7.0Roadmap-Makecssclassstringsusedintheframeworkconfigurable>
> -
> this one is clear. If there are no objections then I'll pick it soon
> (unless someone else does it before me).
>
> I'm going to investigate few tickets about bookmarkable mappers
> (MountMapper, MountedMapper, PackageMapper and ResourceMapper) and their
> handling of named parameters in the path/segments.
>
> Unless someone has more ideas what can be improved for Wicket 7 I think we
> are pretty close to be "feature complete" and we can release a milestone or
> release candidate.
>
> I'd like to thank Cedric Gatay, Michael Mossman, Andrea Del Bene and John
> Sarman for their help so far!
>