On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org> > wrote: > > I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. > > It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. > > The benefit is that some of these things are improved there (e.g. p.1) > and > > it is possible to make more radical changes. Changing the default > behavior > > for p.2 will make Wicket's HTML not so *ugly* but will break many > > applications in production. No matter how ugly is the generated code I'll > > veto such change in 6.x. > > Yup. 6.x should not pull the rug underneath existing users. > > > > About the non technical part. > > I also have concerns about the way you express your opinion. English is > not > > my native language and I may misunderstood the meaning of some parts but > I > > find your language a bit harsh. Please try to avoid doing this. > > It is strongly opinionated, especially given that it touches about the > only two places where Wicket does this. Could it be worded > They are not many but definitely not just two. RadioChoice have the same problem with prefix/suffix. https://github.com/l0rdn1kk0n/wicket-bootstrap/blob/master/bootstrap-core/src/main/java/de/agilecoders/wicket/core/markup/html/bootstrap/form/BootstrapRadioChoice.java#L67 https://github.com/l0rdn1kk0n/wicket-bootstrap/blob/master/bootstrap-core/src/main/java/de/agilecoders/wicket/core/markup/html/bootstrap/form/BootstrapRadioChoice.java#L105 does a lot just to un-mangle the HTML produced by Wicket's default component. > differently, certainly. > > I do feel this comes from the right place: Wicket should walk the path > of least surprise. In 2004-2005 when Wicket was envisioned, the > link/checkbox behaviour was about what you'd expect of a web > framework. Come 2010- the current behaviour doesn't meet > expectations–it should be reversed for these two points (enable > extension, but have default be non-modifying) > Fully agree with the technical part of the Garret's mail ! > > Martijn >
