On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Daniel Stoch <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> >> wrote: .... >> >> There are no good extension points in Wicket-Webjars when I can >> plug-in my own implementation. Eg. there is IRecentVersionProvider but >> its implementation cannot be changed - there are many statics which >> cannot be overriden. >> >> >> PS. I still think that the whole webjars concept is a little bit >> overdesigned and a good example how to complicate simple things ;). >> > > One can say the same for OSGi (only with a bigger magnitude!)
Yes, you're right. It is far more compilcated. But OSGi solves some problems which does not have another good solution in Java world. Usage of WebJars can be easily replaced with very simple solution (like IJavaScriptLibrarySettings in Wicket core). This is over a dozen lines of code to get the same effect (allow to customize JS files). I'm not offensive here, the only thing is that I don't see a good reason to use WebJars solution or rather Wicket-WebJars integration in its actual implementation (for me it is not worth it) :). -- Daniel
