Could you please review my commit for inmethod grid: [1] I don't really like such implementation (converters are being saved 2 times in instances, and might be lost in case it was badly overridden) but I see no other way how this can be done :(
Thanks in advance! [1] https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/commit/1b4b75fcba4e53093f684c780c42e660494ade3a#diff-d871ebf4919c6d117d0121591f27c229R97 On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: > I thought build failed is expected :)) > Will try to remove this dependency to wicket-datetime, and perform > migration :) > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I mean weird :-D >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:44 AM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> >> build is successful .... >> >> That's weird ... >> >> >> > >> > Why it's wired :) ? Before the merge I switched the wicket-datetime >> > dependency to the namesake module we have migrated to WicketStuff. >> > >> > will try to manually update the dependencies for one of the modules >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >> solomax...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > WICKET-6105 was merged :)) >> >> > I'm checking wicketstuff build :) >> >> > >> >> > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> That's a plan! >> >> >> >> >> >> Sven >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Am 07.10.2017 um 18:16 schrieb Andrea Del Bene: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Sure we should! But I'd like not to break the build when we will >> merge >> >> >>> (hopefully soon) WICKET-6105. After we have merged it we will have >> all >> >> >>> the >> >> >>> time to migrate the code to the new extensions module. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Oct 7, 2017 5:32 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> This make sense :) >> >> >>>> I'll try to find some time and check some of these modules >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> >> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>> Hi, >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> IMHO we should set a good example by migrating these modules to >> use >> >> the >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>> new >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>> classes in wicket-extensions. >> >> >>>>> We don't want to provide support for wicket-datetime forever, do >> we? >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Regards >> >> >>>>> Sven >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Am 07.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Andrea Del Bene: >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>>> Hi, >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> WicketStuff is currently depending on Wicket 'wicket-datetime' >> for >> >> >>>>>> three >> >> >>>>>> subprojects: >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> - wicket-scala >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> - inmethod-grid >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> - wicketstuff-portlet-examples >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> I think we should replace it with the corresponding module we >> have >> >> >>>>>> migrated to WicketStuff. >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> What do you think? >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -- >> >> >>>> WBR >> >> >>>> Maxim aka solomax >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > WBR >> >> > Maxim aka solomax >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> WBR >> >> Maxim aka solomax >> >> >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
