Non-binding: I am very interested in long-term OSGi support, but the features being released into Wicket under the "release candidate" moniker is becoming a joke. If it's not a bug fix, it belongs on the other side of the line.
-1 option 1 because it will annoy many people, +1 option 2 if it doesn't require a custom maven plugin, and +0 option 3 since 1.6 needn't be too far out. Regards, Dan On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Martijn Dashorst < [email protected]> wrote: > Also, many folks already migrated their applications to 1.5. And many > projects depending on wicket (wicket stuff) have done their migrations > as well. I seriously doubt anyone will look fondly upon our project > when we decide to move things around yet again. In fact it would be > detrimental to our credibility and I seriously question why we even > consider this in 1.5-rc6 stage... > > Martijn > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Martijn Dashorst > <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1) -1 on moving packages around: little gain with maximum pain. I even > > -1 this for 1.6 or later without proper discussing and minimizing the > > effects of moving things around > > > > 2) +1 it appears not to require a special, self hosted and maintained > plugin > > > > 3) well a lot of work has been put into cleaning out our closets as well. > > > > What people seem to forget is that OSGi web development is a nice to > > have, not an essential thing. While I appreciate the efforts that go > > into supporting OSGi better in Wicket, there are tens of thousands > > that don't care about OSGi, have been with us for the better part of > > our 7 year existence and have built thousands of existing projects > > that run in production. Shifting things around creates work for those > > tens of thousands with no benefit for them. Don't assume that moving > > core functionality to another package is a light thing: it touches all > > code, and nothing says a 8 letter word more than breaking stuff > > between releases. > > > > I don't mind supporting OSGi in Wicket, but I don't want us to loose > > track of our existing user base and sure as hell don't want to break > > all applications out there with little benefit. We already break > > enough API between releases. > > > > Martijn > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> a lot of energy has gone into discussing and prototyping wicket+osgi > >> in the past few days. > >> > >> it seems the biggest obstacle is that there are split packages between > >> wicket-[core,request,util] jars. usually we wouldnt fix this now > >> because we are in RCs and it requires moving pretty much all classes, > >> for example all classes in core/o.a.w would have to move to > >> core/o.a.w.core, which is roughly 99% of all classes in Wicket. the > >> fix should be relatively easy, running fix imports on the project from > >> an IDE would fix all user-code, but like i said, i do acknowledge it > >> is pretty damn late in the game to do such a thing. > >> > >> the alternative, however, seems also rather nasty. we would have to > >> shade (merge) util and request modules under core. we would also have > >> to maintain a custom maven plugin, that would be part of our build, > >> that can generate osgi manifests for the shaded jar. this would also > >> mean we would have to support the said plugin for all possible > >> versions of maven out there that people building wicket from source > >> use. > >> > >> yet another alternative is to basically give the finger to the osgi > >> community and do nothing. they can repackage the jar to meet their > >> needs elsewhere, maybe in wicketstuff. i dont think this is really an > >> option given how much of people's energy and time went into even > >> discovering these options, but its here for completeness' sake. > >> > >> so here are our options: > >> > >> 1) fix the split package problem now with a big > >> package-rename-refactor that will affect all existing code that > >> depends on 1.5. > >> > >> 2) introduce a custom maven plugin to shade/manifest wicket-core. fix > >> the split package problem in wicket.next. > >> > >> 3) leave osgi support out of 1.5 > >> > >> vote ends saturday 8/20 at 10:30am gmt-7. > >> > >> -igor > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > > > > > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >
