2008/9/12 Timo Rantalaiho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Jan Stette wrote:
> > Absolutely, I see what you're saying. Part of the problem here may be
> that
> > on the project I'm working on, WicketTester is indeed used to do
> > integration/functional tests. I'm not sure why this was
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Jan Stette wrote:
> Absolutely, I see what you're saying. Part of the problem here may be that
> on the project I'm working on, WicketTester is indeed used to do
> integration/functional tests. I'm not sure why this was done in the first
> place, but it does seem to work - mo
2008/9/11 Timo Rantalaiho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Timo, thanks for your reply. See below for comments.
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Jan Stette wrote:
> > I've had a few problems with WicketTester recently and would like to
> submit
> > a request for when it gets overhauled for version 1.5 (is that still
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Jan Stette wrote:
> I've had a few problems with WicketTester recently and would like to submit
> a request for when it gets overhauled for version 1.5 (is that still the
> plan by the way?):
Depending on what exactly "overhaul" means (English is not
my native language), yes
Hi all,
I've had a few problems with WicketTester recently and would like to submit
a request for when it gets overhauled for version 1.5 (is that still the
plan by the way?):
It would be really useful to have a clean way to hook in code to execute
pre- and post-request for operations that take p
