Commit access for wicketstuff
Hi, I would like commit access for wicket stuff, and corresponding rights on teamcity and jira for contrib-tinymce. I have the following user accounts: sourceforge: pointbrk (note the different spelling). wicketstuff teamcity: pointbreak wicketsuff jira: pointbreak I would like to backport (from a commercial project) the following changes/additions to contrib-tinymce: - Update to the latest stable release of TinyMce - Addition of behaviors and a component for "In Place Editing" (click the component, e.g. a div and it turns into a TinyMce editor). - Addition of a TinyMce plugin + Wicket behaviors for Ajax saving and updating of the edited content. - Fixes to some classes that don't behave correctly in a replicated setup. - And there's probably more to come Thanks!
Re: Commit access for wicketstuff
Hi It's some time since I last granted permissions, been on vacation.. You should now have permissions on jira and sourceforge. It looked like you already had permission on teamcity, could you confirm? And I do believe that team city arent strictly needed, since your changes in source will trigger a build:) Gerjon de Vries wrote: Hi, I would like commit access for wicket stuff, and corresponding rights on teamcity and jira for contrib-tinymce. I have the following user accounts: sourceforge: pointbrk (note the different spelling). wicketstuff teamcity: pointbreak wicketsuff jira: pointbreak I would like to backport (from a commercial project) the following changes/additions to contrib-tinymce: - Update to the latest stable release of TinyMce - Addition of behaviors and a component for "In Place Editing" (click the component, e.g. a div and it turns into a TinyMce editor). - Addition of a TinyMce plugin + Wicket behaviors for Ajax saving and updating of the edited content. - Fixes to some classes that don't behave correctly in a replicated setup. - And there's probably more to come Thanks! -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
did you get permission for this? Michael Sparer wrote: As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 involved major changes (see http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me permission to do so (my username is msparer). thanks in advance regards, Michael - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) Nino.Martinez wrote: > > did you get permission for this? > > Michael Sparer wrote: >> As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 >> involved >> major changes (see >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as >> dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API >> changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. >> I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So >> please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me >> permission to do so (my username is msparer). >> >> thanks in advance >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> > > -- > -Wicket for love > > Nino Martinez Wael > Java Specialist @ Jayway DK > http://www.jayway.dk > +45 2936 7684 > > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19027831.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
Im not sure but did you get the authors blessing or are he emeritus? If true then i'll go ahead and grant permissions:) Michael Sparer wrote: Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) Nino.Martinez wrote: did you get permission for this? Michael Sparer wrote: As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 involved major changes (see http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me permission to do so (my username is msparer). thanks in advance regards, Michael - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
> 2. The CometD servlet now has to be loaded before the CometDService can be > instanciated. > So you would have to initialize it on demand in your application. I ran into that this morning. Can't this be avoided? I didn't look into the code thoroughly yet, but I saw that CometdService is now extending jetty's Bayeux Service which needs the Bayeux in the constructor. Having the ServletContext initialised at the time my Beans are instantiated is kinda tricky for me, as I can't initialise the services lazily as there is a whole lot of cross-dependencies. I could do it the hard way and remove the service from my springcontext, let it be instantiated by the application and add the application as reference-bean to the services that formerly needed the ChannelService - but this sounds like a workaround, doesn't it? When jetty implemented their new BayeuxService they must have thought about such a problem, haven't they? How did you go about this? regards, Michael On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 > involved > major changes (see > http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as > dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API > changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. > I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So > please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me > permission to do so (my username is msparer). > > thanks in advance > > regards, > Michael > > - > Michael Sparer > http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19002588.html > Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19027990.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
Actually I wrote to Vincent Demay (who is the original author of the push project) some weeks ago about a slight change but never received an answer. His last commit also was some time ago (like a year or so) - if you feel unsure about granting me permission, I could give you the version number and you perform the branch, that's no problem for me and I also wouldn't feel offended ;-) regards, Michael Nino.Martinez wrote: > > Im not sure but did you get the authors blessing or are he emeritus? > > If true then i'll go ahead and grant permissions:) > > Michael Sparer wrote: >> Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) >> >> Nino.Martinez wrote: >> >>> did you get permission for this? >>> >>> Michael Sparer wrote: >>> As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 involved major changes (see http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me permission to do so (my username is msparer). thanks in advance regards, Michael - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >>> -- >>> -Wicket for love >>> >>> Nino Martinez Wael >>> Java Specialist @ Jayway DK >>> http://www.jayway.dk >>> +45 2936 7684 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> > > -- > -Wicket for love > > Nino Martinez Wael > Java Specialist @ Jayway DK > http://www.jayway.dk > +45 2936 7684 > > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19028034.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
No that's enough for me. youre in on sourceforge, please say if you want permissions for jira etc..:) Michael Sparer wrote: Actually I wrote to Vincent Demay (who is the original author of the push project) some weeks ago about a slight change but never received an answer. His last commit also was some time ago (like a year or so) - if you feel unsure about granting me permission, I could give you the version number and you perform the branch, that's no problem for me and I also wouldn't feel offended ;-) regards, Michael Nino.Martinez wrote: Im not sure but did you get the authors blessing or are he emeritus? If true then i'll go ahead and grant permissions:) Michael Sparer wrote: Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) Nino.Martinez wrote: did you get permission for this? Michael Sparer wrote: As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 involved major changes (see http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me permission to do so (my username is msparer). thanks in advance regards, Michael - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
Alright it works, just did the branch - thanks a lot or "tak" as a friend told me to say ;-) Nino.Martinez wrote: > > No that's enough for me. youre in on sourceforge, please say if you want > permissions for jira etc..:) > > > Michael Sparer wrote: >> Actually I wrote to Vincent Demay (who is the original author of the push >> project) some weeks ago about a slight change but never received an >> answer. >> His last commit also was some time ago (like a year or so) - if you feel >> unsure about granting me permission, I could give you the version number >> and >> you perform the branch, that's no problem for me and I also wouldn't feel >> offended ;-) >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> >> Nino.Martinez wrote: >> >>> Im not sure but did you get the authors blessing or are he emeritus? >>> >>> If true then i'll go ahead and grant permissions:) >>> >>> Michael Sparer wrote: >>> Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) Nino.Martinez wrote: > did you get permission for this? > > Michael Sparer wrote: > > >> As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 >> involved >> major changes (see >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far >> as >> dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major >> API >> changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. >> I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. >> So >> please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me >> permission to do so (my username is msparer). >> >> thanks in advance >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> >> >> > -- > -Wicket for love > > Nino Martinez Wael > Java Specialist @ Jayway DK > http://www.jayway.dk > +45 2936 7684 > > > > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >>> -- >>> -Wicket for love >>> >>> Nino Martinez Wael >>> Java Specialist @ Jayway DK >>> http://www.jayway.dk >>> +45 2936 7684 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> > > -- > -Wicket for love > > Nino Martinez Wael > Java Specialist @ Jayway DK > http://www.jayway.dk > +45 2936 7684 > > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19028556.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Enterprise Application
Hi, Can anyone tell me an example of an enterprise application developed with wicket? In an discussion some people said, that they think, that wicket is not suited for enterprise scaled applications. "what you see, is what you believe" could solve this problem. thanks Michael Mosmann
Re: Enterprise Application
Fabulously40.com survives digg.com effects. LasVegas.com is also Wicket based (or at least parts of it) finan.nl doesn't have a public application, but their Wicket web based solution will be used inside major banks *world wide*. Sounds like me that these companies are able to make Wicket work on a big scale. There is also a german based travel agency that has deployed 20-30 sites based on one Wicket code base iirc. It also depends on what you call enterprise application... Vocus is a SaaS solution for high schools in the Netherlands. Though 250-300 concurrent users isn't that much of a scaling problem, we do need to handle 120K-200K requests per day. It is quite an intensively used application, with a very broad functionality base. Martijn On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Michael Mosmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me an example of an enterprise application developed > with wicket? In an discussion some people said, that they think, that > wicket is not suited for enterprise scaled applications. "what you see, > is what you believe" could solve this problem. > > thanks > > Michael Mosmann > > > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com Apache Wicket 1.3.4 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
Re: Enterprise Application
Hi Michael, here [1] you find a list with sites using wicket. > There is also a german based travel agency that has deployed 20-30 > sites based on one Wicket code base iirc. Der.de, Dertour.de or meiers-weltreisen.de are mentioned there, too Witold [1]. http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/sites-using-wicket.html
Re: Enterprise Application
Am Montag, den 18.08.2008, 12:55 +0200 schrieb Witold Czaplewski: > Hi Michael, > > here [1] you find a list with sites using wicket. i know. > > There is also a german based travel agency that has deployed 20-30 > > sites based on one Wicket code base iirc. > > Der.de, Dertour.de or meiers-weltreisen.de are mentioned there, too i think the use tapestry in main parts, so they are not a good example. mm:)
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
I looked a bit more into the code and came to the conclusion that having to depend on the order the servlets and services are loaded is kind of a Bad Thing (tm). A user shouldn't have to care about such things. I had a look at the CometdService and I think one could circumvent the problem if we use the CometdService as a facade to the BayeuxService (rather than a subclass). This way we could initialise the BayeuxService lazily (which will be on first subscription to a channel) and wouln't have to depend on servlet orders or the time the ServletContext gets initialised. And as the only two methods used from the Bayeuxservice are getClient() and getBayeux() it wouldn't be too difficult. What do you, wicketstuff-push-commiters, or Rodolfo, think about that? Wouldn't be work at all for you as I have commit access - but I rather ask you first as you did the upgrade to 1.3.4 ;-) regards, Michael Michael Sparer wrote: > >> 2. The CometD servlet now has to be loaded before the CometDService can >> be >> instanciated. >> So you would have to initialize it on demand in your application. > > I ran into that this morning. Can't this be avoided? I didn't look into > the code thoroughly yet, but I saw that CometdService is now extending > jetty's Bayeux Service which needs the Bayeux in the constructor. Having > the ServletContext initialised at the time my Beans are instantiated is > kinda tricky for me, as I can't initialise the services lazily as there is > a whole lot of cross-dependencies. > I could do it the hard way and remove the service from my springcontext, > let it be instantiated by the application and add the application as > reference-bean to the services that formerly needed the ChannelService - > but this sounds like a workaround, doesn't it? > When jetty implemented their new BayeuxService they must have thought > about such a problem, haven't they? > How did you go about this? > > regards, > Michael > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Michael Sparer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 >> involved >> major changes (see >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as >> dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API >> changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. >> I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So >> please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me >> permission to do so (my username is msparer). >> >> thanks in advance >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19002588.html >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19029986.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Enterprise Application
There is also a german based travel agency that has deployed 20-30 sites based on one Wicket code base iirc. Der.de, Dertour.de or meiers-weltreisen.de are mentioned there, too i think the use tapestry in main parts, so they are not a good example. mm:) don't think *sigh*... look at the html output.. for example at meiers-weltreisen you even can see the tags there... also, I dont know what BS question it is to ask for a "enterprise application" - what is this for you? complexity? concurrent users? security? ... an EA is nothing special, just a kind of buzzword - and the last time on discussions like this: TECHNOLOGY DOESN'T MATTER AS MUCH AS THE DEVELOPER THAT IS GOING TO IMPLEMENT AND USE IT! regards
Re: Enterprise Application
Hi, > Fabulously40.com survives digg.com effects. Thanks for this information.:) > finan.nl doesn't have a public application, but their Wicket web based > solution will be used inside major banks *world wide*. good example... > Sounds like me that these companies are able to make Wicket work on a big > scale. I think the same way. I am not the guy who has doubts about it. > It also depends on what you call enterprise application... I am looking for complex applications on the client side. > Vocus is a SaaS solution for high schools in the Netherlands. Though > 250-300 concurrent users isn't that much of a scaling problem, we do > need to handle 120K-200K requests per day. It is quite an intensively > used application, with a very broad functionality base. Can you post a link? Is there any public information? Thanks Michael Mosmann
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
Hehe. Det var så lidt:) Michael Sparer wrote: Alright it works, just did the branch - thanks a lot or "tak" as a friend told me to say ;-) Nino.Martinez wrote: No that's enough for me. youre in on sourceforge, please say if you want permissions for jira etc..:) Michael Sparer wrote: Actually I wrote to Vincent Demay (who is the original author of the push project) some weeks ago about a slight change but never received an answer. His last commit also was some time ago (like a year or so) - if you feel unsure about granting me permission, I could give you the version number and you perform the branch, that's no problem for me and I also wouldn't feel offended ;-) regards, Michael Nino.Martinez wrote: Im not sure but did you get the authors blessing or are he emeritus? If true then i'll go ahead and grant permissions:) Michael Sparer wrote: Nope, I don't think so. If I got, I wasn't told :-) Nino.Martinez wrote: did you get permission for this? Michael Sparer wrote: As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 involved major changes (see http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far as dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me permission to do so (my username is msparer). thanks in advance regards, Michael - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Enterprise Application
If it's about getting your wicket application to support huge loads, it's mainly not wicket thats the problem but what else you use, hibernate, spring etc.. But all these things can be solved by using caches... Only thing I find missing with caching with wicket would be something like a prepending keyword strategy to be able for a cache to distinguish easy what you can cache and what not. [1]=http://www.nabble.com/Dynamic-PrependKeywordEncodingStrategy--%28making-a-simple-rule-for-caching-with-apache%29-td19006754.html#a19006754 Martijn Dashorst wrote: Fabulously40.com survives digg.com effects. LasVegas.com is also Wicket based (or at least parts of it) finan.nl doesn't have a public application, but their Wicket web based solution will be used inside major banks *world wide*. Sounds like me that these companies are able to make Wicket work on a big scale. There is also a german based travel agency that has deployed 20-30 sites based on one Wicket code base iirc. It also depends on what you call enterprise application... Vocus is a SaaS solution for high schools in the Netherlands. Though 250-300 concurrent users isn't that much of a scaling problem, we do need to handle 120K-200K requests per day. It is quite an intensively used application, with a very broad functionality base. Martijn On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Michael Mosmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Can anyone tell me an example of an enterprise application developed with wicket? In an discussion some people said, that they think, that wicket is not suited for enterprise scaled applications. "what you see, is what you believe" could solve this problem. thanks Michael Mosmann -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Enterprise Application
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Michael Mosmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Vocus is a SaaS solution for high schools in the Netherlands. Though >> 250-300 concurrent users isn't that much of a scaling problem, we do >> need to handle 120K-200K requests per day. It is quite an intensively >> used application, with a very broad functionality base. > > Can you post a link? Is there any public information? It was featured at the Wicket meetup in november last year, the slides are available here: http://www.slideshare.net/dashorst/wicket-live-on-stage It is an application specific for dutch educational institutions tailored to the Dutch laws, so there is little value in international documentation. If you can read dutch (German is just dutch with an accent :), you can take a look at: http://vocuslis.nl/ Another good example of a complex, scalable website built with Wicket is teachscape (Eelco, Igor and Matej work/have worked there). It handles much more users than Vocus, and is also a complex beast. More information here: http://teachscape.com Martijn -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com Apache Wicket 1.3.4 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
Simple rule for cache?
Hi A couple of days ago I wrote a mail to the users list about a very simple way of making a cache rule, basicly a wicket page can runtime say if it's cacheable or not by adding a special keyword to the url (for example cachable). So urls become /cachable/mypage or /mypage etc . However I can't quite figure the last bits out. Doing this would really help out when caching with apache http. Please see the mail I wrote on it for details, what am I doing wrong? [1]=http://www.nabble.com/Dynamic-PrependKeywordEncodingStrategy--%28making-a-simple-rule-for-caching-with-apache%29-td19006754.html#a19006754 -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Enterprise Application
> It was featured at the Wicket meetup in november last year, the slides > are available here: > > http://www.slideshare.net/dashorst/wicket-live-on-stage > > It is an application specific for dutch educational institutions > tailored to the Dutch laws, so > there is little value in international documentation. If you can read > dutch (German is just > dutch with an accent :), you can take a look at: > > http://vocuslis.nl/ > > Another good example of a complex, scalable website built with Wicket > is teachscape (Eelco, > Igor and Matej work/have worked there). It handles much more users > than Vocus, and is also > a complex beast. More information here: > > http://teachscape.com > > Martijn > thanks for your information.. the will help a lot. :) Michael Mosmann
Re: wicketstuff-push update
I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd like to address: - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it as dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess of javascript libraries - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only found resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references that aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able to use dojo at all ... - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not sure) that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should be java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, i'm using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. so keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they would have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know existing ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in the other push thread, i think) ... regards, Michael Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. > > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in > touch > with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real > incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on > wicketstuff-dojo. > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for my >> app >> and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty of >> proposing a branch to have a ready-to-run version with the prior release >> of >> cometd and dojo (see >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-to19002588.html >> ) >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> > >> > Hey guys, >> > >> > I was talking in irc about updating wicketstuff-push to support the >> more >> > recent versions of the bayeux protocol and cometd servlets. >> > >> > So I endeded up with access to the wicketstuff svn and have just >> uploaded >> > a >> > new preliminary version of wicketstuff-push. >> > >> > there are still some issues and alot of ironing out, but the project >> now >> > works with the latest stable versions of jetty, wicket, cometd, there >> is >> a >> > new feature available where you can listen for a clients disconnect >> from >> a >> > web page (actually cometd session).. >> > >> > the new version is 1.3.4-SNAPSHOT if anyone is interested in cheking it >> > out, >> > or helping me continue the cleanup... >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Rodolfo Hansen. >> > >> > >> >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19002629.html >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19032686.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Permission for branching wicketstuff-push
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > I looked a bit more into the code and came to the conclusion that having to > depend on the order the servlets and services are loaded is kind of a Bad > Thing (tm). A user shouldn't have to care about such things. I had a look > at > the CometdService and I think one could circumvent the problem if we use > the > CometdService as a facade to the BayeuxService (rather than a subclass). > This way we could initialise the BayeuxService lazily (which will be on > first subscription to a channel) and wouln't have to depend on servlet > orders or the time the ServletContext gets initialised. And as the only two > methods used from the Bayeuxservice are getClient() and getBayeux() it > wouldn't be too difficult. What do you, wicketstuff-push-commiters, or > Rodolfo, think about that? Wouldn't be work at all for you as I have commit > access - but I rather ask you first as you did the upgrade to 1.3.4 ;-) Yes, that is the better option. I'm still in a bit in a hurry to get the RemoveListener functionality for another project I was working on. > > > regards, > Michael > > Michael Sparer wrote: > > > >> 2. The CometD servlet now has to be loaded before the CometDService can > >> be > >> instanciated. > >> So you would have to initialize it on demand in your application. > > > > I ran into that this morning. Can't this be avoided? I didn't look into > > the code thoroughly yet, but I saw that CometdService is now extending > > jetty's Bayeux Service which needs the Bayeux in the constructor. Having > > the ServletContext initialised at the time my Beans are instantiated is > > kinda tricky for me, as I can't initialise the services lazily as there > is > > a whole lot of cross-dependencies. > > I could do it the hard way and remove the service from my springcontext, > > let it be instantiated by the application and add the application as > > reference-bean to the services that formerly needed the ChannelService - > > but this sounds like a workaround, doesn't it? > > When jetty implemented their new BayeuxService they must have thought > > about such a problem, haven't they? > > How did you go about this? > > > > regards, > > Michael > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Michael Sparer > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > >> > >> As the recent change from wicketstuff-push 1.3.0-SNAPSHOT to 1.3.4 > >> involved > >> major changes (see > >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-to18765345.html) as far > as > >> dependencies are concerned (new version of jetty-cometd with major API > >> changes), I'd suggest a 1.3.0 branch. > >> I do have commit rights but don't have permission to do the branch. So > >> please either branch wicketstuff-push from version 3267 or give me > >> permission to do so (my username is msparer). > >> > >> thanks in advance > >> > >> regards, > >> Michael > >> > >> - > >> Michael Sparer > >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19002588.html > >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > - > Michael Sparer > http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-tp19002588p19029986.html > Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
Re: wicketstuff-push update
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd like > to > address: > - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it as > dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo > versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess of > javascript libraries I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and 1.0, its a huge effort. Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think wicketstuff-push should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo > > - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only found > resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class > AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references that > aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able to > use dojo at all ... ? What do you mean exactly? The dojo files are in src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... > > - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not > sure) > that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should be > java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, > i'm > using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) Oops, will fix. > > - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version > existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as > you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. so > keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they would > have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know existing > ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the end, I think we will be better off, no? > > > and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in the > other push thread, i think) ... > > regards, > Michael > > Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > > > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. > > > > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in > > touch > > with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real > > incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on > > wicketstuff-dojo. > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > >> > >> I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for my > >> app > >> and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty of > >> proposing a branch to have a ready-to-run version with the prior release > >> of > >> cometd and dojo (see > >> > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-to19002588.html > >> ) > >> > >> regards, > >> Michael > >> > >> > >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > >> > > >> > Hey guys, > >> > > >> > I was talking in irc about updating wicketstuff-push to support the > >> more > >> > recent versions of the bayeux protocol and cometd servlets. > >> > > >> > So I endeded up with access to the wicketstuff svn and have just > >> uploaded > >> > a > >> > new preliminary version of wicketstuff-push. > >> > > >> > there are still some issues and alot of ironing out, but the project > >> now > >> > works with the latest stable versions of jetty, wicket, cometd, there > >> is > >> a > >> > new feature available where you can listen for a clients disconnect > >> from > >> a > >> > web page (actually cometd session).. > >> > > >> > the new version is 1.3.4-SNAPSHOT if anyone is interested in cheking > it > >> > out, > >> > or helping me continue the cleanup... > >> > > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > > >> > Rodolfo Hansen. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> - > >> Michael Sparer > >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19002629.html > >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> > > > > > > > - > Michael Sparer > http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19032686.html > Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
Re: wicketstuff-push update
so you think it wouldn't be worth the effort to do the upgrade to 1.0 in the dojo project? how much effort are we talking about? :-) but you'll still end-up with two different dojo versions if you use both wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo in one project. that's kind of misleading and overhead, isn't it? the error stuff: don't you get wicket-errors such as "shared resource org.wicketstuff.push.cometd.dojo.AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior/dojo/lfx/*.js not found" ? actually you should as AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior calls public static final ResourceReference DOJO = new CompressedResourceReference(AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior.class, "dojo/dojo.js"); on line 71 ... and there isn't a PackageResource like that - sure you checked in all your sources? shouldn't the resources in src/main/resources be added somewhere as resource in the code. either i didn't find them or i missed a point completely :-) and yes, sure, upgrading to the latest versions of cometd and dojo is definitely a good idea, no doubt about that. but i believe one should first talk about the basic stuff as we do in this thread :-) regards, Michael Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd like >> to >> address: >> - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it >> as >> dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo >> versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess of >> javascript libraries > > > I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and 1.0, > its a huge effort. > Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think wicketstuff-push > should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo > >> >> - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only >> found >> resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class >> AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references >> that >> aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able >> to >> use dojo at all ... > > > ? What do you mean exactly? > The dojo files are in src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo > and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... > > > >> >> - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not >> sure) >> that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should be >> java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, >> i'm >> using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) > > > Oops, will fix. > >> >> - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version >> existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as >> you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. >> so >> keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they >> would >> have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know existing >> ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? > > > Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the > end, > I think we will be better off, no? > >> >> >> and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in >> the >> other push thread, i think) ... >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> > >> > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. >> > >> > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in >> > touch >> > with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real >> > incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on >> > wicketstuff-dojo. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for >> my >> >> app >> >> and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty >> of >> >> proposing a branch to have a ready-to-run version with the prior >> release >> >> of >> >> cometd and dojo (see >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-to19002588.html >> >> ) >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hey guys, >> >> > >> >> > I was talking in irc about updating wicketstuff-push to support the >> >> more >> >> > recent versions of the bayeux protocol and cometd servlets. >> >> > >> >> > So I endeded up with access to the wicketstuff svn and have just >> >> uploaded >> >> > a >> >> > new preliminary version of wicketstuff-push. >> >> > >> >> > there are still some issues and alot of ironing out, but the project >> >> now >> >> > works with the latest stable versions of jetty, wicket, cometd, >> there >> >> is >> >> a >> >> > new feature available where you can listen for a clients disconnect >> >> from >> >> a >> >> > w
Re: wicketstuff-push update
I'd also suggest to keep the dependency on wicketstuff-dojo after moving it to dojo 1.0. There should really be only one dojo.js in the classpath, even if wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo are used. If it comes to an update, I'd suggest to only upgrade the base functionality (providing dojo resources) at the beginning. Upgrading the components can follow later as needed. I really think wicketstuff-dojo deserves some love! Is anybody else interested in an upgrade to the latest dojo version? Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd like >> to >> address: >> - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it >> as >> dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo >> versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess of >> javascript libraries > > > I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and 1.0, > its a huge effort. > Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think wicketstuff-push > should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo > >> >> - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only >> found >> resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class >> AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references >> that >> aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able >> to >> use dojo at all ... > > > ? What do you mean exactly? > The dojo files are in src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo > and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... > > > >> >> - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not >> sure) >> that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should be >> java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, >> i'm >> using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) > > > Oops, will fix. > >> >> - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version >> existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as >> you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. >> so >> keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they >> would >> have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know existing >> ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? > > > Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the > end, > I think we will be better off, no? > >> >> >> and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in >> the >> other push thread, i think) ... >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> > >> > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. >> > >> > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in >> > touch >> > with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real >> > incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on >> > wicketstuff-dojo. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for >> my >> >> app >> >> and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty >> of >> >> proposing a branch to have a ready-to-run version with the prior >> release >> >> of >> >> cometd and dojo (see >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-to19002588.html >> >> ) >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hey guys, >> >> > >> >> > I was talking in irc about updating wicketstuff-push to support the >> >> more >> >> > recent versions of the bayeux protocol and cometd servlets. >> >> > >> >> > So I endeded up with access to the wicketstuff svn and have just >> >> uploaded >> >> > a >> >> > new preliminary version of wicketstuff-push. >> >> > >> >> > there are still some issues and alot of ironing out, but the project >> >> now >> >> > works with the latest stable versions of jetty, wicket, cometd, >> there >> >> is >> >> a >> >> > new feature available where you can listen for a clients disconnect >> >> from >> >> a >> >> > web page (actually cometd session).. >> >> > >> >> > the new version is 1.3.4-SNAPSHOT if anyone is interested in cheking >> it >> >> > out, >> >> > or helping me continue the cleanup... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > >> >> > Rodolfo Hansen. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> - >> >> Michael Sparer >> >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> >> -- >> >> View this message in context: >> >> http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19002629.html >> >> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> - >> Michael Sparer >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com >> -- >> Vi
Re: wicketstuff-push update
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > so you think it wouldn't be worth the effort to do the upgrade to 1.0 in > the > dojo project? how much effort are we talking about? :-) Look into it! the DOJO people have a list of compatibility changes, and movements, and howto fix. But, its very, very incompatible. That was the first idea I had and then abandoned it At the end I decided it wasn't correct in any case since push functionality for wicket should be independent. > > > but you'll still end-up with two different dojo versions if you use both > wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo in one project. that's kind of > misleading and overhead, isn't it? No, I'm planning on cleaning things up, and include only the cometd part, and have it play fair with any other javascript libs... Hopefully you could even have other comet clients on a purely JS side... we need to write some test cases, as this project doesn't have any... > > > the error stuff: don't you get wicket-errors such as "shared resource > org.wicketstuff.push.cometd.dojo.AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior/dojo/lfx/*.js > not found" ? actually you should as AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior calls Nope, no issues, they are included correctly in the jar I have... > > > public static final ResourceReference DOJO = > new CompressedResourceReference(AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior.class, > "dojo/dojo.js"); > > on line 71 ... and there isn't a PackageResource like that - sure you > checked in all your sources? > shouldn't the resources in src/main/resources be added somewhere as > resource > in the code. either i didn't find them or i missed a point completely :-) > > and yes, sure, upgrading to the latest versions of cometd and dojo is > definitely a good idea, no doubt about that. but i believe one should first > talk about the basic stuff as we do in this thread :-) > > regards, > Michael > > > Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > >> > >> I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd > like > >> to > >> address: > >> - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it > >> as > >> dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo > >> versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess > of > >> javascript libraries > > > > > > I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and 1.0, > > its a huge effort. > > Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think wicketstuff-push > > should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo > > > >> > >> - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only > >> found > >> resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class > >> AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references > >> that > >> aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able > >> to > >> use dojo at all ... > > > > > > ? What do you mean exactly? > > The dojo files are in > src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo > > and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... > > > > > > > >> > >> - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not > >> sure) > >> that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should > be > >> java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, > >> i'm > >> using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) > > > > > > Oops, will fix. > > > >> > >> - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version > >> existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as > >> you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. > >> so > >> keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they > >> would > >> have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know > existing > >> ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? > > > > > > Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the > > end, > > I think we will be better off, no? > > > >> > >> > >> and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in > >> the > >> other push thread, i think) ... > >> > >> regards, > >> Michael > >> > >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > >> > > >> > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. > >> > > >> > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in > >> > touch > >> > with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real > >> > incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on > >> > wicketstuff-dojo. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer > >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for > >> my > >> >> app > >> >> and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the libe
Re: wicketstuff-push update
I would be interested, although it would not be top priority for me.. Stefan Fußenegger wrote: I'd also suggest to keep the dependency on wicketstuff-dojo after moving it to dojo 1.0. There should really be only one dojo.js in the classpath, even if wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo are used. If it comes to an update, I'd suggest to only upgrade the base functionality (providing dojo resources) at the beginning. Upgrading the components can follow later as needed. I really think wicketstuff-dojo deserves some love! Is anybody else interested in an upgrade to the latest dojo version? Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd like to address: - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep it as dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess of javascript libraries I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and 1.0, its a huge effort. Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think wicketstuff-push should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only found resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references that aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being able to use dojo at all ... ? What do you mean exactly? The dojo files are in src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not sure) that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should be java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't care, i'm using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) Oops, will fix. - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 version existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users as you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from svn. so keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they would have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know existing ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate project? Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the end, I think we will be better off, no? and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in the other push thread, i think) ... regards, Michael Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't been able to get in touch with the guy from jetty, and I'll fix the examples as the only real incompatibility is that there is no longer a dependency on wicketstuff-dojo. On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: I appreciate the upgrade and am certainly going to do the upgrade for my app and report errors etc. I hope you don't mind that I took the liberty of proposing a branch to have a ready-to-run version with the prior release of cometd and dojo (see http://www.nabble.com/Permission-for-branching-wicketstuff-push-to19002588.html ) regards, Michael Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: Hey guys, I was talking in irc about updating wicketstuff-push to support the more recent versions of the bayeux protocol and cometd servlets. So I endeded up with access to the wicketstuff svn and have just uploaded a new preliminary version of wicketstuff-push. there are still some issues and alot of ironing out, but the project now works with the latest stable versions of jetty, wicket, cometd, there is a new feature available where you can listen for a clients disconnect from a web page (actually cometd session).. the new version is 1.3.4-SNAPSHOT if anyone is interested in cheking it out, or helping me continue the cleanup... Thanks, Rodolfo Hansen. - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19002629.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - Michael Sparer http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/wicketstuff-push-update-tp18765345p19032686.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - --- Stefan Fußenegger http://talk-on-t
Maintainer TinyMce
Hi, Is Iulian Costan still the maintainer of TinyMce contrib package? I have comitted some stuff to the project (e.g. an InPlaceEditComponent), but have a lot more that could be merged into this project. However it will have an effect on some existing things (like the 'experimental' ajax support that's been there some time now but does not seem to work correctly anyway). Is anyone actively using this stuff? Grtz.
Re: wicketstuff-push update
OK I'll take a look into it :-) Weird that you don't get any errors, because the line I pasted certainly throws errors as the resources are just not there - seems to be a remainder of the copied class. Are you sure you checked in all your changed sources? Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Michael Sparer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> so you think it wouldn't be worth the effort to do the upgrade to 1.0 in >> the >> dojo project? how much effort are we talking about? :-) > > > Look into it! the DOJO people have a list of compatibility changes, and > movements, and howto fix. > But, its very, very incompatible. That was the first idea I had and then > abandoned it > At the end I decided it wasn't correct in any case since push > functionality > for wicket should be independent. > > >> >> >> but you'll still end-up with two different dojo versions if you use both >> wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo in one project. that's kind of >> misleading and overhead, isn't it? > > > No, I'm planning on cleaning things up, and include only the cometd part, > and have it play fair with any other javascript libs... > > Hopefully you could even have other comet clients on a purely JS side... > we > need to write some test cases, as this project doesn't have any... > >> >> >> the error stuff: don't you get wicket-errors such as "shared resource >> org.wicketstuff.push.cometd.dojo.AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior/dojo/lfx/*.js >> not found" ? actually you should as AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior calls > > > Nope, no issues, they are included correctly in the jar I have... > >> >> >> public static final ResourceReference DOJO = >> new CompressedResourceReference(AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior.class, >> "dojo/dojo.js"); >> >> on line 71 ... and there isn't a PackageResource like that - sure you >> checked in all your sources? >> shouldn't the resources in src/main/resources be added somewhere as >> resource >> in the code. either i didn't find them or i missed a point completely :-) >> >> and yes, sure, upgrading to the latest versions of cometd and dojo is >> definitely a good idea, no doubt about that. but i believe one should >> first >> talk about the basic stuff as we do in this thread :-) >> >> regards, >> Michael >> >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd >> like >> >> to >> >> address: >> >> - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep >> it >> >> as >> >> dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo >> >> versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess >> of >> >> javascript libraries >> > >> > >> > I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and >> 1.0, >> > its a huge effort. >> > Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think >> wicketstuff-push >> > should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo >> > >> >> >> >> - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only >> >> found >> >> resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class >> >> AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references >> >> that >> >> aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being >> able >> >> to >> >> use dojo at all ... >> > >> > >> > ? What do you mean exactly? >> > The dojo files are in >> src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo >> > and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not >> >> sure) >> >> that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should >> be >> >> java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't >> care, >> >> i'm >> >> using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) >> > >> > >> > Oops, will fix. >> > >> >> >> >> - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 >> version >> >> existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users >> as >> >> you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from >> svn. >> >> so >> >> keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they >> >> would >> >> have to switch to the branched version ... which they don't know >> existing >> >> ... so shouldn't that whole upgrade thing rather be a separate >> project? >> > >> > >> > Please give 1.3.4 a chance, help me fix these small issues, and at the >> > end, >> > I think we will be better off, no? >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> and the servlet and service problem i mentioned in an earlier post (in >> >> the >> >> other push thread, i think) ... >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> >> > >> >> > No problem, thats why I bumped the version number. >> >> > >> >> > I still need to debug the RemoveListener, haven't
Re: Maintainer TinyMce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is Iulian Costan still the maintainer of TinyMce contrib package? I think Iulian are emeritus, he has turned to the dark RAILS side. I spoke with him some time ago, maybe half a year or so. I have comitted some stuff to the project (e.g. an InPlaceEditComponent), but have a lot more that could be merged into this project. However it will have an effect on some existing things (like the 'experimental' ajax support that's been there some time now but does not seem to work correctly anyway). Is anyone actively using this stuff? I did use it but scraped it because of the lacking ajax support. Grtz. -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684
Re: Maintainer TinyMce
I'm also using TinyMce, but my project is due a big overhaul so adapting to the new code won't be a problem. Thijs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is Iulian Costan still the maintainer of TinyMce contrib package? I have comitted some stuff to the project (e.g. an InPlaceEditComponent), but have a lot more that could be merged into this project. However it will have an effect on some existing things (like the 'experimental' ajax support that's been there some time now but does not seem to work correctly anyway). Is anyone actively using this stuff? Grtz.
Re: wicketstuff-push update
I just committed a couple of changes I had pending including some of the things we were talking about. 1. Its now 1.4 compatible (actually wasn't before I took it) 2. Its no longer a subclass of bayeuxservice 3. only the relevant parts of dojo are included (still some work needed on the independence front) I checked the repo before comitting, and it had the correct code... check how you generated the jar... On 8/18/08, Michael Sparer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > OK I'll take a look into it :-) > > Weird that you don't get any errors, because the line I pasted certainly > throws errors as the resources are just not there - seems to be a remainder > of the copied class. Are you sure you checked in all your changed sources? > > > Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Michael Sparer >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> >>> so you think it wouldn't be worth the effort to do the upgrade to 1.0 in >>> the >>> dojo project? how much effort are we talking about? :-) >> >> >> Look into it! the DOJO people have a list of compatibility changes, and >> movements, and howto fix. >> But, its very, very incompatible. That was the first idea I had and then >> abandoned it >> At the end I decided it wasn't correct in any case since push >> functionality >> for wicket should be independent. >> >> >>> >>> >>> but you'll still end-up with two different dojo versions if you use both >>> wicketstuff-push and wicketstuff-dojo in one project. that's kind of >>> misleading and overhead, isn't it? >> >> >> No, I'm planning on cleaning things up, and include only the cometd part, >> and have it play fair with any other javascript libs... >> >> Hopefully you could even have other comet clients on a purely JS side... >> we >> need to write some test cases, as this project doesn't have any... >> >>> >>> >>> the error stuff: don't you get wicket-errors such as "shared resource >>> org.wicketstuff.push.cometd.dojo.AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior/dojo/lfx/*.js >>> not found" ? actually you should as AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior calls >> >> >> Nope, no issues, they are included correctly in the jar I have... >> >>> >>> >>> public static final ResourceReference DOJO = >>> new CompressedResourceReference(AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior.class, >>> "dojo/dojo.js"); >>> >>> on line 71 ... and there isn't a PackageResource like that - sure you >>> checked in all your sources? >>> shouldn't the resources in src/main/resources be added somewhere as >>> resource >>> in the code. either i didn't find them or i missed a point completely :-) >>> >>> and yes, sure, upgrading to the latest versions of cometd and dojo is >>> definitely a good idea, no doubt about that. but i believe one should >>> first >>> talk about the basic stuff as we do in this thread :-) >>> >>> regards, >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> Rodolfo Hansen-2 wrote: >>> > >>> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Michael Sparer >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> I had a more thorough look into it now and there are some issues I'd >>> like >>> >> to >>> >> address: >>> >> - wouldn't it be better to lift wicketstuff-dojo to dojo 1.0 and keep >>> it >>> >> as >>> >> dependency to wicketstuff-push? otherwise there are two seperate dojo >>> >> versions and if you use ws-dojo and ws-push you end up in a whole mess >>> of >>> >> javascript libraries >>> > >>> > >>> > I looked into that. The dojo API changed drastically between 0.4 and >>> 1.0, >>> > its a huge effort. >>> > Albeit i think eventually it should be done, but I think >>> wicketstuff-push >>> > should end up independent from wicketstuff-dojo >>> > >>> >> >>> >> - where in your code do you reference the new dojo libraries? i only >>> >> found >>> >> resourcereferences in the copied and shortened class >>> >> AbstractDefaultDojoBehavior that point to /dev/null i.e. to references >>> >> that >>> >> aren't existing, leading to wicket throwing errors and to not being >>> able >>> >> to >>> >> use dojo at all ... >>> > >>> > >>> > ? What do you mean exactly? >>> > The dojo files are in >>> src/main/resources/org/wicketstuff/push/cometd/dojo >>> > and it is working correctly in the projects I am using... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >>> >> - you sometimes used generics for e.g. hashmaps - i think (but i'm not >>> >> sure) >>> >> that all wicket and wicketstuff versions lower than wicket 1.4. should >>> be >>> >> java 1.4 compatible and generics came with java 5 ... well i don't >>> care, >>> >> i'm >>> >> using java 6, but i think there might be a few that do care :-) >>> > >>> > >>> > Oops, will fix. >>> > >>> >> >>> >> - speaking of users, although there's now a branch for the 1.3.0 >>> version >>> >> existing, i think that might confuse or upset wicketstuff-push users >>> as >>> >> you're only chance to get wicketstuff-push is to check it out from >>> svn. >>> >> so >>> >> keeping up-to-date with their version (i.e. 1.3.0) isn't easy as they >>> >> would >>> >> have to switch to the branched versi
