[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-3218?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13003219#comment-13003219
]
Igor Vaynberg commented on WICKET-3218:
---------------------------------------
currently people can migrate their apps from 1.4 to 1.5 in about a day or two.
but this change would take many days as every single page and component would
have to be touched. further complications come from the fact that users will
have to wait for all the non-core libraries used in their applications to be
upgraded as well since this is a world-breaking change. i think such change is
better suited for wicket 2.0 instead of a minor version release...but like i
said, start a vote/discussion thread to get the community feedback.
> Component#onInitialize is broken for Pages
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WICKET-3218
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-3218
> Project: Wicket
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: wicket-core
> Affects Versions: 1.4.14
> Reporter: Carl-Eric Menzel
> Assignee: Igor Vaynberg
> Fix For: 1.5-RC1
>
> Attachments:
> 0001-delay-oninitialize-until-just-before-onconfigure.patch
>
>
> As first mentioned at
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/wicket-dev/201012.mbox/%3c1291238699.1749.1408166...@webmail.messagingengine.com%3E
> , I think the current (Wicket 1.4.14) implementation of
> Component#onInitialize is broken for Pages. Pages get initialized as soon as
> the first component is added, which is correct. But this usually happens
> within the constructor of the page, which means that the page object isn't
> fully initialized yet. The entire point of having onInitialize, however, is
> to be able to do further work once all constructors have run. See
> https://github.com/duesenklipper/wicket-oninitialize for a quickstart that
> demonstrates the problem.
> Pedro Santos suggested in the above thread to just switch the entire object
> construction to onInitialize. I don't think this is a good idea, because
> 1) it is completely counter-intuitive
> 2) it is not always realistic to have an entire class hierarchy not using the
> constructor just because a subclass somewhere might want to use onInitialize
> 3) it is inconsistent with onInitialize behavior for all other (non-Page)
> components. Here I can easily mix work in the constructor with onInitialize.
> I propose the following patch:
> - override onInitialize in Page and make it final, so Pages can't use this
> any more. This should not cause any unnecessary breaking, since currently
> it's not working for pages anyway.
> - introduce Page#onPageInitialize to provide a safe alternative to
> onInitialize
> - make a special case for Page in Component's beforeRender to fire
> Page#onPageInitialize if necessary
> Yes, this is a bit of special casing for Page, but there's quite a lot of
> that needed for Page anyway. I think the impact of this should be minimal.
> My page includes documentation and a new testcase that verifies the new
> behavior. I modified the old ComponentInitializationTest to reflect the fact
> that Page doesn't get onInitialize any more.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
