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 <s...@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! >> >> >
