Well lets give it a try with Wicket. However when it comes to the real collaboration and UI effects I think we will heavily use jQuery. We will first have to integrate our application in a Maven styled project.
I guess we can still use ANT to compile certain aspect of our application, Maven can trigger ANT build scripts. http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-antrun-plugin/ seems to be a perfect tool for us. However some of the Ivy dependency management might be difficult to set up. Lets try that out. Sebastian 2012/8/27 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]>: > Hello Sebastian, > > sorry for the late reply (was out of city with no internet access) > While proposing using Apache Wicket I thought of following: > > 1) Displaying of lists: configuration, language labels, rooms etc. > 2) Use of Ajax to refresh only parts of page displayed. > > We definitely can use JS libraries (like jQuery UI) only but this will > make code less readable. I believe Apache Wicket will be good for > Admin menu etc. And we can easily add jQuery UI to it. > > Instead of Wicket we can use Spring MVC and Velocity. > I have proposed Wicket only because I have more experience with it and > from my point of view it is easy to maintain. > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 12:23 AM, [email protected] > <[email protected]> wrote: >> After some discussion I would like to propose to integrate Apache >> Wicket and try it out. >> I have update the document: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENMEETINGS/DHTML+Proposal >> Please add your notes. >> >> Thanks >> Sebastian >> >> 2012/8/24 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >>> This would be my proposal: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENMEETINGS/DHTML+Proposal >>> >>> 2012/8/24 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >>>> What if we instead of Apache Wicket use Apache Velocity to provide the >>>> basic structure of the HTML websites? >>>> All dynamically loaded data, rendering of items could be then done by >>>> jQuery. >>>> That way we will have a set of html templates to work on and a UI >>>> framework to manipulate it. >>>> >>>> Sebastian >>>> >>>> 2012/8/24 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >>>>> I would like to share this use-case >>>>> >>>>> In the next iteration I would like to put the Chat box as a permanent >>>>> box similar to what is in Google+ and Facebook on the bottom. >>>>> That mean no matter where you go, admin section, room list, dashboard >>>>> => the chat always stays the same, so a complete page refresh is not >>>>> possible. >>>>> I would simply replace the DIV that contains the main content with new >>>>> one when switching between main menu entries. >>>>> >>>>> What do you think about that? >>>>> How would that affect the framework discussion? >>>>> >>>>> Sebastian >>>>> >>>>> 2012/8/24 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >>>>>> When it comes to rendering and UI component frameworks you come to >>>>>> projects like: >>>>>> code.google.com/p/wiquery >>>>>> http://www.7thweb.net/jquery-ui-samples/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Simple search for "Apache Wicket UI samples" and you find tons of >>>>>> jQuery examples that are used in Apache Wicket. >>>>>> >>>>>> So from my point of view Apache Wicket is simply no UI framework. It >>>>>> is a web-framework. How things render is not part of it. Practically >>>>>> it might mean that we could combine Apache Wicket with jQuery too. But >>>>>> why use Apache Wicket then at all? We have already a backend with Rest >>>>>> Services and everything. Wicket would duplicate that. What parts of >>>>>> Wicket would we really use? >>>>>> >>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/8/24 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> Can you show examples of Apache Wicket UI widgets and animation? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2012/8/24 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> I would recommend to review Apache Wicket. >>>>>>>> It is MVC it has lots of UI components like paged lists table views >>>>>>>> etc. >>>>>>>> It had built-in AJAX support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In general I'll vote for moving to DHTML >>>>>>>> On Aug 24, 2012 3:57 PM, "[email protected]" >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I would like to start a discussion about options to migrate and a >>>>>>>>> Roadmap for the upcomfing versions. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is our current situation: >>>>>>>>> We currently have two client side application a) + b) >>>>>>>>> a) Audio/Video related stuff is all the SWF10 app >>>>>>>>> b) whiteboard, administration + all the rest in the SWF8 app. >>>>>>>>> The two SWFs communicate via LocalConnection with each other. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are three options from my point of view: >>>>>>>>> 1) refactor the SWF8 app to SWF11 and keep the LocalConnection >>>>>>>>> 2) refactor the SWF8 and merge SWF8 with SWF10 app to a single SWF11 >>>>>>>>> app and get rid of the LocalConnection workaround >>>>>>>>> 3) refactor the SWF8 app to HTML5 and only use SWF for the audio/video >>>>>>>>> part. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> option 1 is the easiest thing to do >>>>>>>>> option 2 is the best from architecture point of view >>>>>>>>> option 3 is the best for moving to HTML5 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From my point of view it would be the best option to start DHTML >>>>>>>>> refactoring now (in a version 3.0 branch) and release the current >>>>>>>>> trunk tree (as version 2.1). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For the transition to DHTML we have several options: >>>>>>>>> I) Refactor to DHTML using OpenLaszlo >>>>>>>>> II) Refactor to DHTML using a JavaScript framework (jQuery, Dojo, >>>>>>>>> Apache Wicket, Spring+MVC) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My personal preference is using jQuery. It provides components for UI >>>>>>>>> and animation and is the most widespread. From a project point of view >>>>>>>>> it will be more easy to attract new developers if they can use tools >>>>>>>>> that they are comfortable in. And I really don't want to code a client >>>>>>>>> side application that requires heavy usage of the page-refresh. That >>>>>>>>> would be like moving back in time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are some architectural questions that we should discuss for the >>>>>>>>> JavaScript refactoring. >>>>>>>>> However there should be some kind of consens on the overall RoadMap >>>>>>>>> first. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So what do you think? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Sebastian Wagner >>>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>>>>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>>>>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sebastian Wagner >>>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sebastian Wagner >>>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sebastian Wagner >>>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>>>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sebastian Wagner >>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sebastian Wagner >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >>> http://www.webbase-design.de >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >>> [email protected] >> >> >> >> -- >> Sebastian Wagner >> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock >> http://www.webbase-design.de >> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com >> [email protected] > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax -- Sebastian Wagner https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com [email protected]
