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.vaynb...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@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! >
