the big question is if 1.4 and 1.3 where api wise very much the same is there still a high demand for java4 wicket yes or no at this time?
If there still are quite a lot of deployments on java4 then we have to maintain it for a while. If not then all those 1.3 users could switch to 1.4 quite easy if we make sure that there are not many other api changes and different behaviors in the code. So the question is how many are still stuck on java4?? johan 2008/3/15 Martin Benda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > OK, fine, then make the 1.3.3 version the last 1.3 release! Why not? Java > 5 > was released more than three years ago and is somebody is still stuck to > Java > 1.4 he will also surely don't mind to stick to Wicket 1.3.3... Well, > that's > just my opinion, but I think that Java 5 users should become preferred... > > Regrads, > Bendis > > On Saturday 15 of March 2008 11:54:00 Johan Compagner wrote: > > I am sorry but if you cant move to M1 for that then you just have to > > be on 1.3, thats just it. You can do your own patches yes so the > > things we patch on 1.3 you apply on 1.4-m1. > > > > Look if everybody just tells us release a generified 1.3 so 1.4 now > > (within a few weeks) and you can drop 1.3 completely then. Then that > > 1.4 is fine by me, so then 1.3.3 (release at +/- the same time as 1.4) > > is then pretty much the last one (maybe only exceptional security bug > > fixes only) > > > > Johan > > > > On 3/15/08, Jeremy Thomerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It may be unlikely, but I foresee a potential problem with this. A > lot > > > of us are talking about moving our production apps to this release > that > > > includes generics. That means our bread and butter is dependent on > it. > > > What if we push out a 1.4-M1 that has generics (+ miscellaneous), then > > > everyone starts working on other things, and in the meantime we > discover > > > a bug in M1 that effects us? We can't necessarily just drop in 1.4-M2 > , > > > because there are likely to be API breaks. Do we all have to manage > > > adding patches to the release (1.4-M1-plus-custom-patches)? > > > > > > That's one of the reasons many companies won't allow a milestone / > beta > > > release to be depended on in production. Can we think of another > > > solution? Perhaps 1.4 goes out quick, and to ease the concern of > > > supporting 1.3 / 1.4/ 1.5 concurrently, 1.4 only has limited support - > > > for urgent / critical patches? Or someone from among us that really > want > > > generics would be willing to do the merges / etc associated with > > > supporting it? > > > > > > I'm just throwing ideas out there - feel free to shoot me down with a > > > much better idea. > > > > > > Jeremy Thomerson > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > This is the plan. > > > > > > > > x-m1 is 1.3 + generics (+ any bugs that could be solved in the mean > > > > time). > > > > > > > > x-m2 is what we are planning now. > > > > > > > > Martijn > > > > > > > > On 3/14/08, Stefan Lindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > And if the wicket core developers do not want to have 1.3 + 1.4 + > 2.0 > > > > > in > > > > > > > > parallel: I believe that we old wicket 2.0 users could live with xM1 > > > > > > (=1.3+ Generics) > > > > > > > > That means: > > > > > 1. Not need to support more than 2 branches/Versions > > > > > 2. Very quick generics for wicket based upan a stable release > > > > > 3. We old Wicket 2 users now can mitgrate to xM1, having new > > > > > features > > > > > > > > and Generics > > > > > > > > > 4. We old Wicket 2 users have to suffer a few API changes until > > > > > > > > releasing x but I think we can live with this. > > > > > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > > > Von: Martin Benda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 14. März 2008 22:49 > > > > > > > > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > > > Betreff: Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation > > > > > > > > > > ...and the answer is: We would like to see java5-only major > release > > > > > > > > *ASAP* If you are going to add many new features in the next major > > > > > > release, > > > > > > > those poor "early 2.0 adopters" (like me and my co-workers) will > have > > > > to wait another 6-12 months... > > > > > > > > > +1 for 1.4 = 1.3 + java5 :-) > > > > > > > > > > Bendis > > > > > > > > > > Dne Friday 14 of March 2008 22:32:35 Igor Vaynberg napsal(a): > > > > > > the question, sounds like, is not whether or not java5 will > make > > > > > > it into the next major release - that has always been a given, > the > > > > > > question is whether or not the next "major" release should > simply > > > > > > be 1.3+java5 stuff ONLY which would allow it to be released > very > > > > > > quickly... > > > > > > > > > > > > -igor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Martin Benda > > > > > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Wicket devs, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we are in the same situation too :-) For more than a year we > > > > > > > are stuck to the dead 2.0 branch and are still hopefully > > > > > > > awaiting the new generified major release. Old 2.0 with a few > > > > > > > patches works > > > > > > > > quite > > > > > > > > > > > fine but we won't probably survive waiting another year for > the > > > > > > 1.4/2.0 > > > > > > > release... > > > > > > > > > > > So I'm totally +1 for adding only generics and other Java > 1.5 > > > > > > > features in the next major release... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > Bendis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dne Friday 14 of March 2008 22:14:56 Stefan Lindner > napsal(a): > > > > > > > > Dear Philip, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we are in the same situation. Just starting a new project, > we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed to write a generic wrapper for all the wicket > classes > > > > > > > > (Model, Component, etc.). We are waiting for a generic > wicket > > > > > > > wersion > now for a year. Having a genierfied wicket version > > > > > > > > (let's > > > > > > > > > > > call it > 1.4M1 or 2.0M1) wohlg make us sooo happ. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Migration to wicket 1.3 was impossible because of heavy > > > > > > > > generic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > usage > all around our code. It's hard to imagine how to use > > > > > > > wicket's model > without generics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I totally agree with your opinion: "Quit punishing us 2.0 > > > > > > > > early > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adopters already". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is still a pleasuere to use OLD wicket 2.0 and it still > > > > > > > > works > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pretty stable. And I am sure it will be much more pleasure > to > > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > > > > > > with a generified wicket 1.4/2.0 > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Philip A. Chapman > > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Freitag, 14. März 2008 > > > > > > > 22:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Planning Wicket > Next > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Generation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ++++++++++1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've been waiting on generics since 2.0 was killed. As an > > > > > > > > early > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > adopter of 2.0, I've been struggling with a few projects > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > where > written against 2.0. So far, I've fought off the > urge > > > > > > > to convert to > 1.3 simply because it doesn't make sense to > > > > > > > rewrite for 1.3, then > again for 1.4. Also, these projects > > > > > > > make *heavy* use of generics and > it would be a terrible > pain > > > > > > > to re-write them without. I'd rather go > straight to the > > > > > > > generics version. Quit punishing us 2.0 early adopters > > > > > > > > already. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeremy Thomerson wrote: > > > > > > > > > I definitely don't have any votes in this, but I have > > > > > > > > > several > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > production apps running with Wicket, and use 1.5 / > generics > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all > > of them. Has there been any discussion of a faster > > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > > that > > ONLY includes generics? Last I remember, someone > had > > > > > > > the generics > > patch(es) basically done, and just needed > to > > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would really like to see generics soon, but if they > get > > > > > > > > > put > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > with all the other features for 1.4, it would be 6-9 > > > > > > > months (at > > least) before I could use them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeremy Thomerson > > > > > > > > > -- sent from a wireless device > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: "Johan Compagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dev@wicket.apache.org > > Sent: 3/14/08 4:23 PM > > > Subject: > > > > > > > Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation > > > > Its not that > > > > > > > revolutionairy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example if 1.4 was just 1.3+generics then if your > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > > > > > like > > vocus thats already on 1.5 it would be a drop in > > > > > > > replacement. So api > > and 'feature' wise not much has > happend > > > > > > > then, only easy of > > development (for most not all are > fans > > > > > > > ;)) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/14/08, Martijn Dashorst > > > > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> On 3/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i > > > > > > > > >>> think > > > > > > > > > > > > > > first > >>> we need to make a list of all major things we > want > > > > > > > to go into it, > >>> and then decide. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I think it counts as revolutionary: abandoning Java 1.4is > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> revolutionary I think. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or > plan > > > > > > > > >>> > on > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > features added? > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> personally i think we should come up with a list of > all > > > > > > > > >>> the > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> features we want, throw them into a backlog, and > timebox > > > > > > > > >>> it. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >> See the wishlist: > > > > > > > > >> http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > 3 - how many milestones do we plan? > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> id like 6. 1-4 dev, 5-6 stabalizaton. we were never > able > > > > > > > > >>> to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > get > >>> away with just one beta release before, most bugs > are > > > > > > > found after > >>> we put out the first beta...so i dont > expect > > > > > > > a lot of bugs to be > >>> found until the last dev > milestone > > > > > > > goes > > > > > > > > out. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Fine with me. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > 4 - which features go into each milestone? > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> what are the features? :) > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >> :D > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Martijn > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > > >> Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorstApache > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wicket > >> 1.3.1 is released Get it now: > > > > > > > > >> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Martin Benda > > > > > > > Technology Leader > > > > > > > __________________________________________ > > > > > > > Cleverlance - The Clever Enterprise Solutions The Winner of > > > > > > > the Technology FAST 50 for Czech Republic > www.cleverlance.com > > > > > > > <http://www.cleverlance.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > European Business Center > > > > > > > Dukelských hrdinů 34 > > > > > > > 170 00 Praha 7 > > > > > > > Czech Republic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Phone: +420 266 177 166 > > > > > > > Cell.: +420 774 470 824 > > > > > > > Fax: +420 266 177 155 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Martin Benda > > > > > Technology Leader > > > > > __________________________________________ > > > > > Cleverlance - The Clever Enterprise Solutions The Winner of the > > > > > > > > Technology FAST 50 for Czech Republic www.cleverlance.com < > > > > http://www.cleverlance.com/> > > > > > > > > > European Business Center > > > > > Dukelských hrdinů 34 > > > > > 170 00 Praha 7 > > > > > Czech Republic > > > > > > > > > > Phone: +420 266 177 166 > > > > > Cell.: +420 774 470 824 > > > > > Fax: +420 266 177 155 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst > > > > Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released > > > > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1 > > > > -- > Martin Benda > Technology Leader > __________________________________________ > Cleverlance - The Clever Enterprise Solutions > The Winner of the Technology FAST 50 for Czech Republic > www.cleverlance.com <http://www.cleverlance.com/> > > European Business Center > Dukelských hrdinů 34 > 170 00 Praha 7 > Czech Republic > > Phone: +420 266 177 166 > Cell.: +420 774 470 824 > Fax: +420 266 177 155 >
