On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 11:24 Thorsten Schöning <tschoen...@am-soft.de> wrote:
> Guten Tag Sven Meier, > am Montag, 31. August 2020 um 18:13 schrieben Sie: > > > I agree with Martin that we shouldn't change this lightheartedly - > > it might break existing applications. > > The order shouldn't be changed at all to circumvent a limitation of the > implementation of one behaviour only. > > > AbstractTransformerBehaviour is special and I don't know of any > > other behavior that needs this if more than one instance is added to a > component. > > And that's the reason why that implementation should be changed. > > > You can just use a single behavior and let it manage a list of > transformators. > > The question is if Wicket should do so in the long term implicitly, so > that users don't need to care at all or explicitly by providing a > container already. Otherwise all users need to implement their own, > which doesn't seem to make too much sense. This perfectly well reads > like infrastructure Wicket could provide and makes a good place to > document the limitation I encountered at the same time. > No one else ever asked for this functionality for 10-15 years. You are welcome to implement, document and contribute it! > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, > > Thorsten Schöning > > -- > Thorsten Schöning E-Mail: thorsten.schoen...@am-soft.de > AM-SoFT IT-Systeme http://www.AM-SoFT.de/ > > Telefon...........05151- 9468- 55 > Fax...............05151- 9468- 88 > Mobil..............0178-8 9468- 04 > > AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Brandenburger Str. 7c, 31789 Hameln > AG Hannover HRB 207 694 - Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow > >
