On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 8:03 AM Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote:
> BTW here is the discussion regarding future of commons-fileupload: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/koclgykqx0sfkrz8tf1w37n15zyql822 > please join :) > Regarding commons-fileupload vs. Servlet API: I've mentioned the reason why Wicket does not use Servlet file upload APIs : - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5192 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5924 (also shows some limitations) Regarding the release of commons-fileupload: I understand it is volunteer work but the Commons people talk about making a release for 3 years now... OK, let's assume they release -M1 next weekend. How much more would it take for a final release ?! The funny part is that commons-fileupload classes were part of wicket-util back in the days but I replaced them with a proper dependency with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5503 :-) > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 21:35, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro > <reier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Yes but then we, wicket developers, will be responsible for tracking file > > upload related issues and port to wicket fixes done in the original > project > > (and vice versa, e.g. I already fixed one thing in wicket copy and had to > > submit a PR to the original project). > > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 5:23 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi Maxim- > > > > > > I understand that preference— this is a build-vs-buy decision. My > point is > > > that a file upload handler makes sense for Wicket to host itself, > > > considering it is a small set of functions and relates to storage > > > management needed by Wicket apps. Also, Wicket is more active in > > > development and adopting JDK and Jakarta EE than the commons-file > upload > > > project. I suspect we’ll be right back here as the Servlet spec is > evolving > > > in Jakarta EE. > > > > > > -Matt > > > > > > > On Jun 16, 2023, at 2:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 at 00:40, Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Why add it back? The feature is just a couple of classes. > > > commons-fileupload2 can continue to serve as a reference > implementation to > > > draw from. > > > >> > > > >> These backside dependencies create headaches when building web > > > applications with Wicket that are platforms that allow end-users to > provide > > > their own plugins or extensions that may use the same or similarly > > > versioned dependencies. > > > > > > > > IMO it's bad practice to copy/paste other libraries, > > > > having fileupload2 as dependency we have all fixes and additional > > > testing :) > > > > > > > > BTW the build of my branch seems to be green, only minor issues with > > > > Automatic-Module-Name remain unresolved :) > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Thanks, > > > >> Matt > > > >> > > > >>> On Jun 14, 2023, at 11:48 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > solomax...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hello All, > > > >>> > > > >>> I've start working on migration back to commons-fileupload 2.0.0-M1 > > > >>> (the branch is here: [1] :))) > > > >>> > > > >>> Latest version of commons-fileupload2 has couple of issues > > > >>> 1) missing `Automatic-Module-Name` > > > >>> 2) FileItemHeadersImpl is not public anymore > > > >>> (discussion is here: [2]) > > > >>> > > > >>> I'm going to have vacation in a couple of days (will be offline > almost > > > >>> all the time :) > > > >>> > > > >>> Can someone take a look at [2] ? > > > >>> So we have all required features at 2.0.0-M1 release? > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks in advance :) > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/commons-fileupload2-back > > > >>> [2] > https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjglf0c1xzdrhm143swfcq0xpg5ofrqk > > > >>> > > > >>> -- > > > >>> Best regards, > > > >>> Maxim > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > Maxim > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards - Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro > > > > -- > Best regards, > Maxim >
