1.1 for me as well

Martijn

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Sven Meier <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> I'd prefer solution 1.1:
>
> - the old solution worked fine, but the properties couldn't be merged for
> uberjar (but nothing I ever worried about)
> - the current solution is flawed, we should get rid of it as soon as
> possible
> - ServiceLoader seems to be a simple working standard.
>
> Regards
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 13.10.2015 21:28, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> There are some issues with the new code for scanning for wicket.properties
>> in 7.0.0:
>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5997 (also discussed at
>>
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33043321/has-anybody-been-able-to-run-wicket-7-0-0-on-websphere-liberty-profile-8-5-5-7
>> )
>> - https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/138
>>
>> At both reports ServiceLoader (SL) is suggested as a better solution for
>> this functionality.
>> When I implemented the current solution I've ignored SL because I remember
>> having issues with it in OSGi environment and I've preferred the current
>> solution because it works well for WebJars.
>>
>> Adding support for SL is easy. The problem is what to do with the current
>> solution.
>> I see these solutions:
>>
>> 1. Add support for SL and "deprecate" the current solution by logging
>> WARNs
>> 1.1. Log WARNs for several releases and then drop the current solution
>> 1.2. Log WARNs until Wicket 8.0.0
>> 2. Add support for SL and remove the current solution for the next release
>>
>> At the moment we log WARN when the old /wicket.properties is detected on
>> the classpath!
>>
>> I am for 1.1 because the current solution is buggy (in uberjar and OSGi
>> envs) and there is no point to support it. But at the same time I see that
>> this would be a bigger change that probably should wait for major release.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>>
>> Martin Grigorov
>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>>
>



-- 
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com

Reply via email to