8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I'd like some comment on WICKET-6498, as that wicket-JS impl. currently is just not good IMHO as its blocking the DOM with JS; Best, KB - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 03:32:48 > Betreff: 8.0.0 blockers > Hello All, > > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello Korbinian,
I have analyzed this issue using our main application.
I have extremely bad report from Chrome Audit tool
Application took 16 seconds to display something meaningful
My first intent was to work with Wicket internals to optimize load time.
BUT My initial page loads lots of scripts from wicketstuff,
wicket-jquery-ui and some internal JS files
So I did the following: initially empty panel with of these pure CSS
loaders http://tobiasahlin.com/spinkit/ is loaded
Additionally jquery+wicket-ajax+wicket-event are loaded to register handler
as soon as handler will get onload event it will start "main" loading
This way user will see sort of progress while loading is being performed in
the background
Your proposal can be implemented, but there should be an option to turn off
wrapping every script with "window.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',
function() {"
I can work on this issue but I would like to hear thought of "senior"
members first :)))
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Korbinian Bachl <
korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote:
> I'd like some comment on WICKET-6498, as that wicket-JS impl. currently is
> just not good IMHO as its blocking the DOM with JS;
>
> Best,
>
> KB
>
>
>
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik"
> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 03:32:48
> > Betreff: 8.0.0 blockers
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0?
> >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
IMHO this isn't a blocker for Wicket 8. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 29. Nov. 2017, um 09:30, Korbinian Bachl schrieb: I'd like some comment on WICKET-6498, as that wicket-JS impl. currently is just not good IMHO as its blocking the DOM with JS; Best, KB - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 03:32:48 Betreff: 8.0.0 blockers Hello All, do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? -- WBR Maxim aka solomax Am 29. Nov. 2017, 09:30, um 09:30, Korbinian Bachl schrieb: >I'd like some comment on WICKET-6498, as that wicket-JS impl. currently >is just not good IMHO as its blocking the DOM with JS; > >Best, > >KB > > > >- Ursprüngliche Mail - >> Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" >> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 03:32:48 >> Betreff: 8.0.0 blockers > >> Hello All, >> >> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? >> >> >> -- >> WBR >> Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even the current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty one js file - still a request); >From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery was >introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my proposal >I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional libraries adding >more JS header items - but it should end up with better rendering overall >IMHO? Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external resouce file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
You can add your scripts to the "custom place" https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" jquery version as the main one for wicket . On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even the > current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty one js > file - still a request); > > From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery was > introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my > proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional > libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with better > rendering overall IMHO? > Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external resouce > file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Not really as were on brix-cms, meaning we dont usually touch wicket and loading the complete JS in header is a bad idea as long as its not capable of beeing defered - the performance gets worse then in our tries - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:01:46 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > You can add your scripts to the "custom place" > https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body > And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" jquery > version as the main one for wicket . > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even the >> current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty one js >> file - still a request); >> >> From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery was >> introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my >> proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional >> libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with better >> rendering overall IMHO? >> Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external resouce >> file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I love to help here But I don't see clear solution . On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Not really as were on brix-cms, meaning we dont usually touch wicket and > loading the complete JS in header is a bad idea as long as its not capable > of beeing defered - the performance gets worse then in our tries > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:01:46 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > You can add your scripts to the "custom place" > > https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/ > single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body > > And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" jquery > > version as the main one for wicket . > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > >> Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even the > >> current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty one js > >> file - still a request); > >> > >> From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery was > >> introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my > >> proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional > >> libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with better > >> rendering overall IMHO? > >> Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external resouce > >> file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Welcome to my world :) Anyway thanks for the hints. Seems i need somehow to make brix-cms be able to at least put that into the footer area at least thats the only way I can think of right now; - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:08:15 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > I love to help here > But I don't see clear solution . > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> Not really as were on brix-cms, meaning we dont usually touch wicket and >> loading the complete JS in header is a bad idea as long as its not capable >> of beeing defered - the performance gets worse then in our tries >> >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" >> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org >> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:01:46 >> > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> >> > You can add your scripts to the "custom place" >> > https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/ >> single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body >> > And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" jquery >> > version as the main one for wicket . >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < >> > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >> > >> >> Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even the >> >> current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty one js >> >> file - still a request); >> >> >> >> From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery was >> >> introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my >> >> proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional >> >> libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with better >> >> rendering overall IMHO? >> >> Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external resouce >> >> file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
For our application I have implemented "delayed load", so for now everything better than it was :))) Now I have time to think about better solution :) On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Welcome to my world :) > > Anyway thanks for the hints. Seems i need somehow to make brix-cms be able > to at least put that into the footer area at least thats the only way I > can think of right now; > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:08:15 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > I love to help here > > But I don't see clear solution . > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > >> Not really as were on brix-cms, meaning we dont usually touch wicket and > >> loading the complete JS in header is a bad idea as long as its not > capable > >> of beeing defered - the performance gets worse then in our tries > >> > >> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail - > >> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" > >> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:01:46 > >> > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >> > >> > You can add your scripts to the "custom place" > >> > https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/ > >> single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body > >> > And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" > jquery > >> > version as the main one for wicket . > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even > the > >> >> current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty > one js > >> >> file - still a request); > >> >> > >> >> From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery > was > >> >> introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my > >> >> proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional > >> >> libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with > better > >> >> rendering overall IMHO? > >> >> Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external > resouce > >> >> file might be the better solution... (e.g.:
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? Martijn On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Hello All, > > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing > right: > > - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are > not Dead Yet™ > - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the > benefits of Wicket 8 > > What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? > > Not blocking but really important: > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can be helpful for further considerations: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > Java will never die :-) > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > Other things to consider: > > - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt Any feedback is welcome! > > Martijn > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > > > > > -- > > WBR > > Maxim aka solomax > > > > > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, Is it time for release? There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket :))) On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing > > right: > > > > - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > > - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we > are > > not Dead Yet™ > > - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the > > benefits of Wicket 8 > > > > What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? > > > > Not blocking but really important: > > > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > > > > I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can be > helpful for further considerations: > > http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ > Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf > > > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > > > Java will never die :-) > > > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > > > Other things to consider: > > > > - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > > > > I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt > > Any feedback is welcome! > > > > > > Martijn > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > > wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > > > > > > > > -- > > > WBR > > > Maxim aka solomax > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > > > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 Have fun Sven Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: Hello All, Is it time for release? There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket :))) On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can be helpful for further considerations: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Java will never die :-) Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt Any feedback is welcome! Martijn On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: Hello All, do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? -- WBR Maxim aka solomax -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
+1 2017-12-29 17:22 GMT+02:00 Sven Meier : > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > > Have fun > Sven > > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > >> Hello All, >> >> Is it time for release? >> >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket >> :))) >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we >>> are >>> not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can >>> be >>> helpful for further considerations: >>> >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf >>> >>> >>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Java will never die :-) >>> >>> >>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: >>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt >>> >>> Any feedback is welcome! >>> >>> >>> Martijn On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik >>> > wrote: Hello All, > > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >> >> >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
May I also mention WICKET-6498? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Sven Meier" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > > Have fun > Sven > > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >> Hello All, >> >> Is it time for release? >> >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket >> :))) >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing >>>> right: >>>> >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we >>> are >>>> not Dead Yet™ >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 >>>> >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? >>>> >>>> Not blocking but really important: >>>> >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" >>>> >>> I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can be >>> helpful for further considerations: >>> >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf >>> >>> >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >>>> >>> Java will never die :-) >>> >>> >>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 >>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) >>>> >>>> Other things to consider: >>>> >>>> - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? >>>> >>> I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: >>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt >>> >>> Any feedback is welcome! >>> >>> >>>> Martijn >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello All, >>>>> >>>>> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> WBR >>>>> Maxim aka solomax >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >>>> >>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new examples. Not a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan Martijn Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> > May I also mention WICKET-6498? > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Sven Meier" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > > > > Have fun > > Sven > > > > > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > >> Hello All, > >> > >> Is it time for release? > >> > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket > >> :))) > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >> wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the > marketing > >>>> right: > >>>> > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we > >>> are > >>>> not Dead Yet™ > >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the > >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 > >>>> > >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? > >>>> > >>>> Not blocking but really important: > >>>> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > >>>> > >>> I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it > can be > >>> helpful for further considerations: > >>> > >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ > >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf > >>> > >>> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > >>>> > >>> Java will never die :-) > >>> > >>> > >>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > Wicket 8 > >>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) > >>>> > >>>> Other things to consider: > >>>> > >>>> - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > >>>> > >>> I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: > >>> > >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt > >>> > >>> Any feedback is welcome! > >>> > >>> > >>>> Martijn > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > solomax...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello All, > >>>>> > >>>>> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> WBR > >>>>> Maxim aka solomax > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > http://wicketinaction.com > >>>> > >> > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new examples. Not > a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan > > Martijn > > > > Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> > > > May I also mention WICKET-6498? > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > > > > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > Von: "Sven Meier" > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 > > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > > > > > > Have fun > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > > >> Hello All, > > >> > > >> Is it time for release? > > >> > > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on > Wicket > > >> :))) > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the > > marketing > > >>>> right: > > >>>> > > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know > we > > >>> are > > >>>> not Dead Yet™ > > >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all > the > > >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 > > >>>> > > >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? > > >>>> > > >>>> Not blocking but really important: > > >>>> > > >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > > >>>> > > >>> I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it > > can be > > >>> helpful for further considerations: > > >>> > > >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ > > >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > >>>> > > >>> Java will never die :-) > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > > Wicket 8 > > >>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > >>>> > > >>>> Other things to consider: > > >>>> > > >>>> - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > > >>>> > > >>> I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: > > >>> > > >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt > > >>> > > >>> Any feedback is welcome! > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> Martijn > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > > solomax...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hello All, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> WBR > > >>>>> Maxim aka solomax > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > > http://wicketinaction.com > > >>>> > > >> > > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi Maxim, I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to defer) and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with addEventListener work in all browsers. Thanks for testing this. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik schrieb: >I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow > >On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new >examples. Not >> a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan >> >> Martijn >> >> >> >> Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> >> >> > May I also mention WICKET-6498? >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 >> > >> > >> > >> > - Ursprüngliche Mail - >> > > Von: "Sven Meier" >> > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org >> > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 >> > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> > >> > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 >> > > >> > > Have fun >> > > Sven >> > > >> > > >> > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >> > >> Hello All, >> > >> >> > >> Is it time for release? >> > >> >> > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time >on >> Wicket >> > >> :))) >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < >> an.delb...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >> > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the >> > marketing >> > >>>> right: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently >> > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world >know >> we >> > >>> are >> > >>>> not Dead Yet™ >> > >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about >all >> the >> > >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 >> > >>>> >> > >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket >8? >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Not blocking but really important: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks >dead?" >> > >>>> >> > >>> I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. >Maybe it >> > can be >> > >>> helpful for further considerations: >> > >>> >> > >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ >> > >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >> > >>>> >> > >>> Java will never die :-) >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact >about >> > Wicket 8 >> > >>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Other things to consider: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? >> > >>>> >> > >>> I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: >> > >>> >> > >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt >> > >>> >> > >>> Any feedback is welcome! >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>>> Martijn >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >> > solomax...@gmail.com> >> > >>>> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> Hello All, >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> -- >> > >>>>> WBR >> > >>>>> Maxim aka solomax >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> -- >> > >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >> > http://wicketinaction.com >> > >>>> >> > >> >> > >> -- >> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >http://wicketinaction.com >> > > > >-- >WBR >Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello Sven, I would like to test using out main app, since initial version seems to be more performant And I believe this would be good way to improve my wicket skills :)) On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > Hi Maxim, > > I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: > There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to > defer) and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with > addEventListener work in all browsers. > > Thanks for testing this. > Sven > > Gesendet mit Blue > > Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik > schrieb: > >I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow > > > >On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > >martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new > >examples. Not > >> a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan > >> > >> Martijn > >> > >> > >> > >> Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> > >> > >> > May I also mention WICKET-6498? > >> > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >> > > Von: "Sven Meier" > >> > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 > >> > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >> > > >> > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > >> > > > >> > > Have fun > >> > > Sven > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > >> > >> Hello All, > >> > >> > >> > >> Is it time for release? > >> > >> > >> > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time > >on > >> Wicket > >> > >> :))) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > >> an.delb...@gmail.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > >> > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the > >> > marketing > >> > >>>> right: > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > >> > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world > >know > >> we > >> > >>> are > >> > >>>> not Dead Yet™ > >> > >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about > >all > >> the > >> > >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket > >8? > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Not blocking but really important: > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks > >dead?" > >> > >>>> > >> > >>> I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. > >Maybe it > >> > can be > >> > >>> helpful for further considerations: > >> > >>> > >> > >>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ > >> > >>> Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > >> > >>>> > >> > >>> Java will never die :-) > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact > >about > >> > Wicket 8 > >> > >>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Other things to consider: > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > >> > >>>> > >> > >>> I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: > >> > >>> > >> > >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Any feedback is welcome! > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> Martijn > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > >> > solomax...@gmail.com> > >> > >>>> wrote: > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>>> Hello All, > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> -- > >> > >>>>> WBR > >> > >>>>> Maxim aka solomax > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> -- > >> > >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > >> > http://wicketinaction.com > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > > >> -- > >> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > >http://wicketinaction.com > >> > > > > > > > >-- > >WBR > >Maxim aka solomax > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break anything and may be added to wicket any time? I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of the browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now as its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default for wicket as the time has changed. I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each time... Best KB PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Sven Meier" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > Hi Maxim, > > I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: > There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to > defer) > and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with > addEventListener work in all browsers. > > Thanks for testing this. > Sven > > Gesendet mit Blue > > Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik > schrieb: >>I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow >> >>On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new >>examples. Not >>> a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan >>> >>> Martijn >>> >>> >>> >>> Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < >>> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> >>> >>> > May I also mention WICKET-6498? >>> > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>> > > Von: "Sven Meier" >>> > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>> > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 >>> > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>> > >>> > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: >>> > > >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 >>> > > >>> > > Have fun >>> > > Sven >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >>> > >> Hello All, >>> > >> >>> > >> Is it time for release? >>> > >> >>> > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time >>on >>> Wicket >>> > >> :))) >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < >>> an.delb...@gmail.com> >>> > >> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>> > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the >>> > marketing >>> > >>>> right: >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently >>> > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world >>know >>> we >>> > >>> are >>> > >>>> not Dead Yet™ >>> > >>>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about >>all >>> the >>> > >>>> benefits of Wicket 8 >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket >>8? >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Not blocking but really important: >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >>> > >>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks >>dead?" >>> > >>>> >>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. ** Martin +0.02 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl : > May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour > (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break anything > and may be added to wicket any time? > > I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason > why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the > big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major > version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of the > browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery > should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now as > its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default > for wicket as the time has changed. > I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each > time... > > Best > > KB > > PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is > just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Sven Meier" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: > > There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to > defer) > > and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with > > addEventListener work in all browsers. > > > > Thanks for testing this. > > Sven > > > > Gesendet mit Blue > > > > Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik > > > schrieb: > >>I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow > >> > >>On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > >>martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new > >>examples. Not > >>> a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan > >>> > >>> Martijn > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < > >>> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> > >>> > >>> > May I also mention WICKET-6498? > >>> > > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >>> > > Von: "Sven Meier" > >>> > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >>> > > Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 > >>> > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >>> > > >>> > > Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: > >>> > > > >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 > >>> > > > >>> > > Have fun > >>> > > Sven > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > >>> > >> Hello All, > >>> > >> > >>> > >> Is it time for release? > >>> > >> > >>> > >> There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time > >>on > >>> Wicket > >>> > >> :))) > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > >>> an.delb...@gmail.com> > >>> > >> wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > >>> > >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the > >>> > marketing > >>> > >>>> right: > >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > >>> > >>>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world > >>know > >>> we > >>> > >>> are > >>> > >>>> not Dead Yet™ > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Please take a look at the pull request: https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do you see a good way to make that configurable? I'd prefer to support a single solution only: addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a central hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already one I'm not aware of). This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force it on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or shortly before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. Regards Sven Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. ** Martin +0.02 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl : May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break anything and may be added to wicket any time? I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of the browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now as its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default for wicket as the time has changed. I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each time... Best KB PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi Maxim, I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to defer) and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with addEventListener work in all browsers. Thanks for testing this. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new examples. Not a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan Martijn Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> May I also mention WICKET-6498? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 Have fun Sven Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: Hello All, Is it time for release? There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on Wicket :))) On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" I (partially) covered these two issues in my presentation. Maybe it can be helpful for further considerations: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/ Wicket_The_story_so_far_and_beyond.pdf - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Java will never die :-) Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? I'm preparing an article for dzone. You can find it here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9ec2plxyhe4aa2/article8.txt Any feedback is welcome! Martijn On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:32
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to 3.x, JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on jQuery! One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, Dojo 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of Wicket. But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > Please take a look at the pull request: > > https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 > > As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do you > see a good way to make that configurable? > > I'd prefer to support a single solution only: > addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a central > hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already > one I'm not aware of). > > This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force it > on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). > IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway > (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or shortly > before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. > > Regards > Sven > > > > Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: > >> If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a >> new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. >> >> ** >> Martin >> +0.02 >> >> 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl > e>: >> >> May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour >>> (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break >>> anything >>> and may be added to wicket any time? >>> >>> I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason >>> why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the >>> big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major >>> version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of >>> the >>> browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery >>> should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now >>> as >>> its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default >>> for wicket as the time has changed. >>> I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each >>> time... >>> >>> Best >>> >>> KB >>> >>> PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is >>> just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time >>> >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>> >>>> Von: "Sven Meier" >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>>> Hi Maxim, >>>> >>>> I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: >>>> There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to >>>> >>> defer) >>> >>>> and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with >>>> addEventListener work in all browsers. >>>> >>>> Thanks for testing this. >>>> Sven >>>> >>>> Gesendet mit Blue >>>> >>>> Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik < >>>> solomax...@gmail.com >>>> >>>> schrieb: >>>> >>>>> I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>>>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new >>>>>> >>>>> examples. Not >>>>> >>>>>> a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan >>>>>> >>>>>> Martijn >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, I don't see a problem with jQuery in Wicket, I see room for improvements. It's how we use jQuery that prevents users from using deferred JavaScript resources. As I have written I don't see this as urgent as Korbinian sees it - for me this is not a 8.0.0 blocker! But for frameworks its important IMHO to adapt to latests technologies (i.e. defer) and community interests (e.g. first page impression). I don't want to tell users to implement their own Wicket.xyz JS just to use newest technologies. I'll try to flesh out my proposal after we got out 8.0.0. Sven Am 02.01.2018 um 12:43 schrieb Martin Grigorov: Hi, 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to 3.x, JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on jQuery! One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, Dojo 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of Wicket. But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: Please take a look at the pull request: https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do you see a good way to make that configurable? I'd prefer to support a single solution only: addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a central hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already one I'm not aware of). This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force it on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or shortly before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. Regards Sven Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. ** Martin +0.02 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl : May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break anything and may be added to wicket any time? I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of the browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now as its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default for wicket as the time has changed. I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each time... Best KB PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi Maxim, I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to defer) and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with addEventListener work in all browsers. Thanks for testing this. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com schrieb: I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new examples. Not a blocker but would be awesome to include. Will work on it 2nd Jan Martijn Op vr 29 dec. 2017 om 20:28 schreef Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> May I also mention WICKET-6498? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Dezember 2017 16:22:47 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Not strictly necessary, but I would like to merge WICKET-6503: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6503 Have fun Sven Am 29.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: Hello All, Is it time for release? There are long holidays upcoming here, so I can send more time on W
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi Martin, i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current integration of all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption to current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't needed anymore - so to say. Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression and high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are limited by wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally the wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built around full async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with jQuery as this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... Best, KB - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Martin Grigorov" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > Hi, > > 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings > 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to 3.x, > JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) > > 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on jQuery! > One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, Dojo > 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via > JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() > Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of Wicket. > > > But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? > Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? > > > Martin Grigorov > Wicket Training and Consulting > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > >> Please take a look at the pull request: >> >> https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 >> >> As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do you >> see a good way to make that configurable? >> >> I'd prefer to support a single solution only: >> addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a central >> hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already >> one I'm not aware of). >> >> This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force it >> on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). >> IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway >> (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or shortly >> before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. >> >> Regards >> Sven >> >> >> >> Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: >> >>> If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a >>> new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. >>> >>> ** >>> Martin >>> +0.02 >>> >>> 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl >> e>: >>> >>> May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour >>>> (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break >>>> anything >>>> and may be added to wicket any time? >>>> >>>> I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason >>>> why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the >>>> big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major >>>> version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of >>>> the >>>> browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery >>>> should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now >>>> as >>>> its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default >>>> for wicket as the time has changed. >>>> I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each >>>> time... >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> KB >>>> >>>> PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is >>>> just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time >>>> >>>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>>> >>>>> Von: "Sven Meier" >>>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 >>>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>>>> Hi Maxim, >>>>> >>>>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi Korbinian, Sven, I am confused. Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later say that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! Martin On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Hi Martin, > > i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current integration of > all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption to > current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't needed > anymore - so to say. > > Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression and > high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are limited by > wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally the > wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built around full > async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with jQuery as > this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... > > Best, > > KB > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Martin Grigorov" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > Hi, > > > > 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings > > 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to > 3.x, > > JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) > > > > 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on > jQuery! > > One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, > Dojo > > 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via > > JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() > > Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of > Wicket. > > > > > > But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? > > Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? > > > > > > Martin Grigorov > > Wicket Training and Consulting > > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > > > >> Please take a look at the pull request: > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 > >> > >> As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do > you > >> see a good way to make that configurable? > >> > >> I'd prefer to support a single solution only: > >> addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a > central > >> hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already > >> one I'm not aware of). > >> > >> This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force > it > >> on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). > >> IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway > >> (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or > shortly > >> before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. > >> > >> Regards > >> Sven > >> > >> > >> > >> Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: > >> > >>> If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens > a > >>> new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. > >>> > >>> ** > >>> Martin > >>> +0.02 > >>> > >>> 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl > >>> e>: > >>> > >>> May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current > behaviour > >>>> (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break > >>>> anything > >>>> and may be added to wicket any time? > >>>> > >>>> I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the > reason > >>>> why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss > the > >>>> big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new > major > >>>> version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement > of > >>>> the > >>>> browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of > jQuery > >>>> should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but > now > >>>> as > >>>> its 2018 I - for exampl
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
> I am confused. We already found what we want, thank you. Sven Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: Hi Korbinian, Sven, I am confused. Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later say that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! Martin On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: Hi Martin, i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current integration of all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption to current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't needed anymore - so to say. Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression and high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are limited by wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally the wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built around full async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with jQuery as this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... Best, KB - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Martin Grigorov" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi, 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to 3.x, JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on jQuery! One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, Dojo 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of Wicket. But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: Please take a look at the pull request: https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do you see a good way to make that configurable? I'd prefer to support a single solution only: addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a central hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's already one I'm not aware of). This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force it on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction anyway (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or shortly before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. Regards Sven Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: If configuration option is final solution then yes, otherwise it opens a new can of worms for backwards (and on-site branching) compatibility. ** Martin +0.02 2018-01-02 12:29 GMT+02:00 Korbinian Bachl e>: May I ask why not a simple Config option? When disabled current behaviour (default) but when turned on new behaviour? That way it wont break anything and may be added to wicket any time? I just ask because this "not in that version" etc. usually is the reason why some Frameworks seems less active/ agile as others. Maybe I miss the big picture but I really would hate it if I have to wait for a new major version of wicket each time we need to keep up with the developement of the browsers... long time ago there was a discussion what version of jQuery should be in wicket and it went on 2, a sane idea at that time, but now as its 2018 I - for example - would instead now only ship JQuery 3.x default for wicket as the time has changed. I wonder how wicket will keep up with that if the cycle is so long each time... Best KB PS: I know that you can override the jQuery version as you like, it is just an example how the "best idea/ way to do it" changes over time - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 10:57:39 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi Maxim, I don't think WICKET-6498 will be part of Wicket 8: There are still conceptual open questions (who decides what resources to defer) and implementation issues, i.e. does the proposed solution with addEventListener work in all browsers. Thanks for testing this. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 2. Jan. 2018, 09:13, um 09:13, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com schrieb: I'll try to test WICKET-6498 today/tomorrow On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: I’m working on restyling the QuickStart to look like the new examples. Not a b
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, M8 was released ~2.5 months ago I believe we should release 8.0.0 (since there are no blockers) or release M9 . On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Sven Meier wrote: >> I am confused. > > We already found what we want, thank you. > > Sven > > > > Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: >> >> Hi Korbinian, Sven, >> >> I am confused. >> Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later say >> that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... >> >> I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! >> >> Martin >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >> >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current integration >>> of >>> all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption to >>> current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't >>> needed >>> anymore - so to say. >>> >>> Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression and >>> high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are limited by >>> wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally the >>> wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built around >>> full >>> async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with jQuery >>> as >>> this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> KB >>> >>> >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>>> >>>> Von: "Martin Grigorov" >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings >>>> 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to >>> >>> 3.x, >>>> >>>> JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) >>>> >>>> 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on >>> >>> jQuery! >>>> >>>> One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, >>> >>> Dojo >>>> >>>> 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via >>>> JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() >>>> Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of >>> >>> Wicket. >>>> >>>> >>>> But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? >>>> Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? >>>> >>>> >>>> Martin Grigorov >>>> Wicket Training and Consulting >>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: >>>> >>>>> Please take a look at the pull request: >>>>> >>>>>https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 >>>>> >>>>> As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do >>> >>> you >>>>> >>>>> see a good way to make that configurable? >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer to support a single solution only: >>>>> addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a >>> >>> central >>>>> >>>>> hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's >>>>> already >>>>> one I'm not aware of). >>>>> >>>>> This way users can defer JavaScript if they want to, but we don't force >>> >>> it >>>>> >>>>> on everyone (e.g. if they still need JavaScriptHeaderItems). >>>>> IMHO moving the framework away from jQuery is the right direction >>>>> anyway >>>>> (see http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/), but perhaps Wicket 8 (or >>> >>> shortly >>>>> >>>>> before the 8.0.0 release) is not the right moment for it. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Sven >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 02.01.2018 um 11:34 schrieb Martin Makundi: >>>>> &
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
+1, don't let perfect be the enemy of good.. Wicket 8 has so many nice things, want to start using them :) On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Hello All, > > M8 was released ~2.5 months ago > I believe we should release 8.0.0 (since there are no blockers) or > release M9 . > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > >> I am confused. > > > > We already found what we want, thank you. > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: > >> > >> Hi Korbinian, Sven, > >> > >> I am confused. > >> Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later say > >> that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... > >> > >> I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! > >> > >> Martin > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Martin, > >>> > >>> i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current integration > >>> of > >>> all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption to > >>> current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't > >>> needed > >>> anymore - so to say. > >>> > >>> Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression and > >>> high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are limited > by > >>> wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally the > >>> wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built around > >>> full > >>> async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with jQuery > >>> as > >>> this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> > >>> KB > >>> > >>> > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >>>> > >>>> Von: "Martin Grigorov" > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings > >>>> 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated to > >>> > >>> 3.x, > >>>> > >>>> JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, ...) > >>>> > >>>> 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on > >>> > >>> jQuery! > >>>> > >>>> One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla JS, > >>> > >>> Dojo > >>>> > >>>> 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via > >>>> JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() > >>>> Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of > >>> > >>> Wicket. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? > >>>> Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Martin Grigorov > >>>> Wicket Training and Consulting > >>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Please take a look at the pull request: > >>>>> > >>>>>https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 > >>>>> > >>>>> As you can see, there are many places that have to work together - do > >>> > >>> you > >>>>> > >>>>> see a good way to make that configurable? > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd prefer to support a single solution only: > >>>>> addEventListener() instead of jQuery "domready"/"load" and maybe a > >>> > >>> central > >>>>> > >>>>> hook allowing to defer all JavaScript resources (perhaps there's > >>>>> already > >>>>> one I'm not aware of). > >>>>> > >>>>> This way users can defer JavaScript if they w
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
We should also to release 7.10.0 as well. Like Martijn said I think the last blocking issues for Wicket 8 are not technical: reworking quickstart style, prepare a press release, etc... On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Rob Audenaerde wrote: > +1, don't let perfect be the enemy of good.. Wicket 8 has so many nice > things, want to start using them :) > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > M8 was released ~2.5 months ago > > I believe we should release 8.0.0 (since there are no blockers) or > > release M9 . > > > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > > >> I am confused. > > > > > > We already found what we want, thank you. > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: > > >> > > >> Hi Korbinian, Sven, > > >> > > >> I am confused. > > >> Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later > say > > >> that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... > > >> > > >> I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! > > >> > > >> Martin > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Martin, > > >>> > > >>> i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current > integration > > >>> of > > >>> all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption > to > > >>> current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't > > >>> needed > > >>> anymore - so to say. > > >>> > > >>> Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression > and > > >>> high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are > limited > > by > > >>> wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally > the > > >>> wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built > around > > >>> full > > >>> async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with > jQuery > > >>> as > > >>> this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... > > >>> > > >>> Best, > > >>> > > >>> KB > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > >>>> > > >>>> Von: "Martin Grigorov" > > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 > > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>> > > >>>> 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings > > >>>> 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated > to > > >>> > > >>> 3.x, > > >>>> > > >>>> JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, > ...) > > >>>> > > >>>> 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on > > >>> > > >>> jQuery! > > >>>> > > >>>> One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla > JS, > > >>> > > >>> Dojo > > >>>> > > >>>> 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via > > >>>> JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() > > >>>> Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of > > >>> > > >>> Wicket. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? > > >>>> Why its event listeners do not work for this use case ? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Martin Grigorov > > >>>> Wicket Training and Consulting > > >>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Sven Meier > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Please take a look at the pull request: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/253 >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Maybe we can list all remaining items here? This might speed up the process :) On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > We should also to release 7.10.0 as well. Like Martijn said I think the > last blocking issues for Wicket 8 are not technical: reworking quickstart > style, prepare a press release, etc... > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Rob Audenaerde > wrote: > >> +1, don't let perfect be the enemy of good.. Wicket 8 has so many nice >> things, want to start using them :) >> >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Maxim Solodovnik >> wrote: >> >> > Hello All, >> > >> > M8 was released ~2.5 months ago >> > I believe we should release 8.0.0 (since there are no blockers) or >> > release M9 . >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Sven Meier wrote: >> > >> I am confused. >> > > >> > > We already found what we want, thank you. >> > > >> > > Sven >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: >> > >> >> > >> Hi Korbinian, Sven, >> > >> >> > >> I am confused. >> > >> Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences later >> say >> > >> that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... >> > >> >> > >> I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! >> > >> >> > >> Martin >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < >> > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> Hi Martin, >> > >>> >> > >>> i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current >> integration >> > >>> of >> > >>> all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an adaption >> to >> > >>> current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers aren't >> > >>> needed >> > >>> anymore - so to say. >> > >>> >> > >>> Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression >> and >> > >>> high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are >> limited >> > by >> > >>> wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally >> the >> > >>> wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built >> around >> > >>> full >> > >>> async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with >> jQuery >> > >>> as >> > >>> this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... >> > >>> >> > >>> Best, >> > >>> >> > >>> KB >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Von: "Martin Grigorov" >> > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >> > >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 >> > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> > >>>> Hi, >> > >>>> >> > >>>> 1) one can always replace the version with JavaScriptLibrarySettings >> > >>>> 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not migrated >> to >> > >>> >> > >>> 3.x, >> > >>>> >> > >>>> JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, >> ...) >> > >>>> >> > >>>> 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends on >> > >>> >> > >>> jQuery! >> > >>>> >> > >>>> One can always implement the Wicket.xyz JS APIs on top of vanilla >> JS, >> > >>> >> > >>> Dojo >> > >>>> >> > >>>> 2.x, Angular 5.x, ... And use it via >> > >>>> JavaScriptLibrarySettings#setWicketAjaxReference() >> > >>>> Such alternative implementation can be introduced at any version of >> > >>> >> > >>> Wicket. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> But what exactly is the problem with jQuery (in Wicket) ? >> > >>>> Why its ev
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
It's not a bad idea :). I think Martijn is the one who has fully visibility on such items. On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Maybe we can list all remaining items here? > This might speed up the process :) > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > We should also to release 7.10.0 as well. Like Martijn said I think the > > last blocking issues for Wicket 8 are not technical: reworking quickstart > > style, prepare a press release, etc... > > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Rob Audenaerde < > rob.audenae...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> +1, don't let perfect be the enemy of good.. Wicket 8 has so many nice > >> things, want to start using them :) > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hello All, > >> > > >> > M8 was released ~2.5 months ago > >> > I believe we should release 8.0.0 (since there are no blockers) or > >> > release M9 . > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Sven Meier wrote: > >> > >> I am confused. > >> > > > >> > > We already found what we want, thank you. > >> > > > >> > > Sven > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Am 04.01.2018 um 10:57 schrieb Martin Grigorov: > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi Korbinian, Sven, > >> > >> > >> > >> I am confused. > >> > >> Both of you say that jQuery is not a problem and few sentences > later > >> say > >> > >> that jQuery prevents the usage of defer/async... > >> > >> > >> > >> I am sure you will find your ways to do what you want! > >> > >> > >> > >> Martin > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Hi Martin, > >> > >>> > >> > >>> i think we dont see jQuery as problem, but mere the current > >> integration > >> > >>> of > >> > >>> all wicket JS and ajax and the depending on it. Its more an > adaption > >> to > >> > >>> current standards, where old IEs and other quirks in browsers > aren't > >> > >>> needed > >> > >>> anymore - so to say. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Currently wicket has a real big problem with first page impression > >> and > >> > >>> high speed rendering on mobile devices as all JS resources are > >> limited > >> > by > >> > >>> wicket in not beeing able to get deffered or even async'd. Ideally > >> the > >> > >>> wicket JS integration not only should accept defer but be built > >> around > >> > >>> full > >> > >>> async into the JS part - that however would not be possible with > >> jQuery > >> > >>> as > >> > >>> this one only allows defer at max as the ordering matters here... > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Best, > >> > >>> > >> > >>> KB > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Von: "Martin Grigorov" > >> > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> > >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Januar 2018 12:43:41 > >> > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >> > >>>> Hi, > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> 1) one can always replace the version with > JavaScriptLibrarySettings > >> > >>>> 2.x is used as default because most jQuery plugins are not > migrated > >> to > >> > >>> > >> > >>> 3.x, > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> JS folks moved to more modern JS solutions (React, Angular, Vue, > >> ...) > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> 2) wicket-ajax-*jquery*.js is named this way because it depends > on > >> > >>> > >> > >>> jQuery! &g
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? Martijn
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing > right: > > - front page of website should feature 8 prominently > - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we > are not Dead Yet™ > - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the > benefits of Wicket 8 > > What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? > > Not blocking but really important: > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > By "having a story" what would you like to have? For example could it be a sort of section on Wicket site (a sort of FAQ section)? > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > Other things to consider: > > - prepare some articles to publish to dzone, voxxed, etc.? > > Martijn >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Martijn Dashorst < > martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing >> right: >> >> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently >> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we >> are not Dead Yet™ >> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the >> benefits of Wicket 8 >> >> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? >> >> Not blocking but really important: >> >> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" >> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >> > > By "having a story" what would you like to have? For example could it be a > sort of section on Wicket site (a sort of FAQ section)? Mostly that we are on the same page and are prepared for those inevitable questions that arise in the comments and from interested journalists. Paul Krill used to want to do an interview with one of the committers about the new release. If we have a canned answer now, that will help us react in a quick way. Martijn
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
>>> push builder support :-) kind regards Tobias > Am 10.01.2018 um 14:39 schrieb Martijn Dashorst : > >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing >>> right: >>> >>> - front page of website should feature 8 prominently >>> - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we >>> are not Dead Yet™ >>> - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the >>> benefits of Wicket 8 >>> >>> What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? >>> >>> Not blocking but really important: >>> >>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" >>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >>> >> >> By "having a story" what would you like to have? For example could it be a >> sort of section on Wicket site (a sort of FAQ section)? > > Mostly that we are on the same page and are prepared for those > inevitable questions that arise in the comments and from interested > journalists. Paul Krill used to want to do an interview with one of > the committers about the new release. If we have a canned answer now, > that will help us react in a quick way. > > Martijn
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Maybe it worth to start the VOTE on the release and announce as soon as all "paper work" will be done? This "no technical blockers" period lasts for 1.5 months I believe we need to move forward with the release :) On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:51 PM, Tobias Soloschenko wrote: push builder support :-) > > kind regards > > Tobias > >> Am 10.01.2018 um 14:39 schrieb Martijn Dashorst : >> >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Martijn Dashorst < >>> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> No technical blockers AFAIK, however, we really should do the marketing right: - front page of website should feature 8 prominently - work with Sally from PR for a press release to let the world know we are not Dead Yet™ - have a really great announcement to give to the world about all the benefits of Wicket 8 What are the key features that necessitate upgrading to Wicket 8? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >>> >>> By "having a story" what would you like to have? For example could it be a >>> sort of section on Wicket site (a sort of FAQ section)? >> >> Mostly that we are on the same page and are prepared for those >> inevitable questions that arise in the comments and from interested >> journalists. Paul Krill used to want to do an interview with one of >> the committers about the new release. If we have a canned answer now, >> that will help us react in a quick way. >> >> Martijn -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:57 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Maybe it worth to start the VOTE on the release and announce as soon > as all "paper work" will be done? No. News sources will not publish any announcement if we have the release ready for weeks, but not announced. There's little news in something that's old. We have to have our message ready (announcements, PR, website) before we release. > This "no technical blockers" period lasts for 1.5 months > I believe we need to move forward with the release :) The future of our project is not only dependent on the technical merits, but also on the social and marketing parts. I'd say each is similar in importance. That said, there's nobody holding anyone back on starting to write the announcement or PR message or propose adjustments for our front page. Martijn
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Just have tried to run local site using this [1] instruction The result was empty "_site" folder and "directory listing" at http://127.0.0.1:4000 What am I doing wrong? [1] http://wicket.apache.org/contribute/write.html On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:57 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: >> Maybe it worth to start the VOTE on the release and announce as soon >> as all "paper work" will be done? > > No. News sources will not publish any announcement if we have the > release ready for weeks, but not announced. There's little news in > something that's old. > > We have to have our message ready (announcements, PR, website) before > we release. > >> This "no technical blockers" period lasts for 1.5 months >> I believe we need to move forward with the release :) > > The future of our project is not only dependent on the technical > merits, but also on the social and marketing parts. I'd say each is > similar in importance. > > That said, there's nobody holding anyone back on starting to write the > announcement or PR message or propose adjustments for our front page. > > Martijn -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
My bad, I have used wrong branch, now everything works as expected On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:32 PM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Just have tried to run local site using this [1] instruction > The result was empty "_site" folder and "directory listing" at > http://127.0.0.1:4000 > What am I doing wrong? > > [1] http://wicket.apache.org/contribute/write.html > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Martijn Dashorst > wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:57 AM, Maxim Solodovnik >> wrote: >>> Maybe it worth to start the VOTE on the release and announce as soon >>> as all "paper work" will be done? >> >> No. News sources will not publish any announcement if we have the >> release ready for weeks, but not announced. There's little news in >> something that's old. >> >> We have to have our message ready (announcements, PR, website) before >> we release. >> >>> This "no technical blockers" period lasts for 1.5 months >>> I believe we need to move forward with the release :) >> >> The future of our project is not only dependent on the technical >> merits, but also on the social and marketing parts. I'd say each is >> similar in importance. >> >> That said, there's nobody holding anyone back on starting to write the >> announcement or PR message or propose adjustments for our front page. >> >> Martijn > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Good luck with Jekyll and Ruby :-D On Jan 14, 2018 11:11 AM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: > My bad, I have used wrong branch, now everything works as expected > > > On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:32 PM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > Just have tried to run local site using this [1] instruction > > The result was empty "_site" folder and "directory listing" at > > http://127.0.0.1:4000 > > What am I doing wrong? > > > > [1] http://wicket.apache.org/contribute/write.html > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Martijn Dashorst > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:57 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > >>> Maybe it worth to start the VOTE on the release and announce as soon > >>> as all "paper work" will be done? > >> > >> No. News sources will not publish any announcement if we have the > >> release ready for weeks, but not announced. There's little news in > >> something that's old. > >> > >> We have to have our message ready (announcements, PR, website) before > >> we release. > >> > >>> This "no technical blockers" period lasts for 1.5 months > >>> I believe we need to move forward with the release :) > >> > >> The future of our project is not only dependent on the technical > >> merits, but also on the social and marketing parts. I'd say each is > >> similar in importance. > >> > >> That said, there's nobody holding anyone back on starting to write the > >> announcement or PR message or propose adjustments for our front page. > >> > >> Martijn > > > > > > > > -- > > WBR > > Maxim aka solomax > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on Google Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > Not blocking but really important: > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > Other things to consider: > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
You can use JIRA for this too. On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on Google > Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > > > > Not blocking but really important: > > > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > > > Other things to consider: > > > > -- > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to create a page. Who can grant them? On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote: > You can use JIRA for this too. > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on > Google > > Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > > > > > > > Not blocking but really important: > > > > > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > > > > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > Wicket 8 > > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > > > > > Other things to consider: > > > > > > -- > > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > > > > > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to create > a page. Who can grant them? > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov > wrote: > >> You can use JIRA for this too. >> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >> > Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on >> Google >> > Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? >> > >> > >> > > Not blocking but really important: >> > > >> > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" >> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >> > > >> > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about >> Wicket 8 >> > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) >> > > >> > > Other things to consider: >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >> http://wicketinaction.com >> > > >> > >> > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as a raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed considerations :-) https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > >> I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to >> create a page. Who can grant them? >> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov >> wrote: >> >>> You can use JIRA for this too. >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on >>> Google >>> > Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? >>> > >>> > >>> > > Not blocking but really important: >>> > > >>> > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >>> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" >>> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >>> > > >>> > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about >>> Wicket 8 >>> > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) >>> > > >>> > > Other things to consider: >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >>> http://wicketinaction.com >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical > tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started > with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as a > raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed considerations > :-) > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene > > wrote: > > > >> I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to > >> create a page. Who can grant them? > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov > >> wrote: > >> > >>> You can use JIRA for this too. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on > >>> Google > >>> > Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Not blocking but really important: > >>> > > > >>> > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > >>> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > >>> > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > >>> > > > >>> > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > >>> Wicket 8 > >>> > > and its future (esp. related to questions above) > >>> > > > >>> > > Other things to consider: > >>> > > > >>> > > -- > >>> > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > >>> http://wicketinaction.com > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Just seen it :-) On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as a raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed considerations :-) https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to create a page. Who can grant them? On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote: You can use JIRA for this too. On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on Google Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release. Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of our official announcement. Thank you. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Just seen it :-) > > > > On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: > >> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project >> >> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. >> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical >>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've >>> started >>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as >>> a >>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed >>> considerations >>> :-) >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ >>> before+GA+release >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>> wrote: >>> >>> Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene >>> > wrote: I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to > create a page. Who can grant them? > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov > > wrote: > > You can use JIRA for this too. >> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < >> an.delb...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >> Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on >>> >> Google >> >>> Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? >>> >>> >>> Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about >>> Wicket 8 >> >>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >>> http://wicketinaction.com >> > > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release date to be 2018-02-12 :)) Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Hi, > > I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but > really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release. > Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the > content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of > our official announcement. > > Thank you. > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > Just seen it :-) > > > > > > > > On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: > > > >> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project > >> > >> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >> wrote: > >> > >> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the > non-technical > >>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've > >>> started > >>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them > as > >>> a > >>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed > >>> considerations > >>> :-) > >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ > >>> before+GA+release > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to > > create a page. Who can grant them? > > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < > mgrigo...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > You can use JIRA for this too. > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > >> an.delb...@gmail.com > >> wrote: > >> > >> Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on > >>> > >> Google > >> > >>> Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > >>> > >>> > >>> Not blocking but really important: > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > > >>> Wicket 8 > >> > >>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > Other things to consider: > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > > >>> http://wicketinaction.com > >> > > > > > > > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, > Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? Yes I think so. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik schrieb: >Hello All, > >I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. >I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ >2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" >release >date to be 2018-02-12 :)) >Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with >"archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > >Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be >moved to "security updates only" mode? > >On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene >wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking >but >> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here >> >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release. >> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing >the >> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version >of >> our official announcement. >> >> Thank you. >> >> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >> wrote: >> >> > Just seen it :-) >> > >> > >> > >> > On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: >> > >> >> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project >> >> >> >> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the >> non-technical >> >>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. >I've >> >>> started >> >>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take >them >> as >> >>> a >> >>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed >> >>> considerations >> >>> :-) >> >>> >> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ >> >>> before+GA+release >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> > >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. >> >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < >> an.delb...@gmail.com >> > >> wrote: >> >> I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights >to >> > create a page. Who can grant them? >> > >> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < >> mgrigo...@apache.org >> > > >> > wrote: >> > >> > You can use JIRA for this too. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < >> >> an.delb...@gmail.com >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for >example on >> >>> >> >> Google >> >> >> >>> Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Not blocking but really important: >> >> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks >dead?" >> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >> >> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact >about >> >> >>> Wicket 8 >> >> >> >>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) >> >> Other things to consider: >> >> -- >> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >> >> >>> http://wicketinaction.com >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >-- >WBR >Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Thank you Maxim! And yes, 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket 6 will be moved to "security updates only" On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Hello All, > > I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. > I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ > 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release > date to be 2018-02-12 :)) > Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with > "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > > Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be > moved to "security updates only" mode? > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but > > really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ > ToDo+before+GA+release. > > Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the > > content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of > > our official announcement. > > > > Thank you. > > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene > > wrote: > > > > > Just seen it :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: > > > > > >> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project > > >> > > >> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the > > non-technical > > >>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've > > >>> started > > >>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them > > as > > >>> a > > >>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed > > >>> considerations > > >>> :-) > > >>> > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ > > >>> before+GA+release > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com > > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < > > an.delb...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to > > > create a page. Who can grant them? > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < > > mgrigo...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > You can use JIRA for this too. > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > > >> an.delb...@gmail.com > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example > on > > >>> > > >> Google > > >> > > >>> Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Not blocking but really important: > > > > - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks > dead?" > > - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" > > > > Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about > > > > >>> Wicket 8 > > >> > > >>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) > > > > Other things to consider: > > > > -- > > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > > > > >>> http://wicketinaction.com > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ see comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 A solution to it is provided :) - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Sven Meier" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > Hi, > >> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be > moved to "security updates only" mode? > > Yes I think so. > > Sven > > Gesendet mit Blue > > Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik > schrieb: >>Hello All, >> >>I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. >>I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ >>2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" >>release >>date to be 2018-02-12 :)) >>Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with >>"archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds >> >>Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be >>moved to "security updates only" mode? >> >>On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking >>but >>> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here >>> >>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release. >>> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing >>the >>> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version >>of >>> our official announcement. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Just seen it :-) >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: >>> > >>> >> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project >>> >> >>> >> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the >>> non-technical >>> >>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. >>I've >>> >>> started >>> >>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take >>them >>> as >>> >>> a >>> >>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed >>> >>> considerations >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ >>> >>> before+GA+release >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>>> > >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < >>> an.delb...@gmail.com >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights >>to >>> >>>>> create a page. Who can grant them? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < >>> mgrigo...@apache.org >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> You can use JIRA for this too. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < >>> >>>>>> an.delb...@gmail.com >>> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for >>example on >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Google >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Not blocking but really important: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" >>> >>>>>>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks >>dead?" >>> >>>>>>>> - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact >>about >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Wicket 8 >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> and its future (esp. related to questions above) >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> Other things to consider: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >> >> >> >>-- >>WBR > >Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi Korbinian, no problem at all! With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax handling. Sven Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ see comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 A solution to it is provided :) - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi, Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? Yes I think so. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik schrieb: Hello All, I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release date to be 2018-02-12 :)) Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Hi, I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+before+GA+release. Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of our official announcement. Thank you. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Just seen it :-) On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as a raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed considerations :-) https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ before+GA+release On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com wrote: I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to create a page. Who can grant them? On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < mgrigo...@apache.org wrote: You can use JIRA for this too. On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com wrote: Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on Google Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, I have question regarding site generation. I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md But news for 2018 are not being generated Is there any debugger I can use? Or maybe I miss something? Copyright year is also 2017 :( On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > Hi Korbinian, > > no problem at all! > > With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve > deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax > handling. > > Sven > > > > Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > >> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ >> >> see comment here: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 >> >> A solution to it is provided :) >> >> >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >> >>> Von: "Sven Meier" >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>> Hi, >>> >>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be >>>> >>> moved to "security updates only" mode? >>> >>> Yes I think so. >>> >>> Sven >>> >>> Gesendet mit Blue >>> >>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik >> > >>> schrieb: >>> >>>> Hello All, >>>> >>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. >>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ >>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" >>>> release >>>> date to be 2018-02-12 :)) >>>> Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with >>>> "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds >>>> >>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be >>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking >>>>> >>>> but >>>> >>>>> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here >>>>> >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ >>>> before+GA+release. >>>> >>>>> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing >>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version >>>>> >>>> of >>>> >>>>> our official announcement. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just seen it :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the >>>>>>> >>>>>> non-technical >>>>> >>>>>> tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've >>>> >>>>> started >>>>>>>> with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> them >>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> a >>>>>>>> raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed >>>>>>>> considerations >>>>>>>> :-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ >>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > Hello All, > > I have question regarding site generation. > > I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > 8.0.0-released.md > But news for 2018 are not being generated > > Is there any debugger I can use? > Or maybe I miss something? > > Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > > > Hi Korbinian, > > > > no problem at all! > > > > With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve > > deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax > > handling. > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > > >> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > >> > >> see comment here: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > >> > >> A solution to it is provided :) > >> > >> > >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >> > >>> Von: "Sven Meier" > >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be > >>>> > >>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > >>> > >>> Yes I think so. > >>> > >>> Sven > >>> > >>> Gesendet mit Blue > >>> > >>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < > solomax...@gmail.com > >>> > > >>> schrieb: > >>> > >>>> Hello All, > >>>> > >>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. > >>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ > >>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" > >>>> release > >>>> date to be 2018-02-12 :)) > >>>> Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with > >>>> "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > >>>> > >>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will > be > >>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking > >>>>> > >>>> but > >>>> > >>>>> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here > >>>>> > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ > >>>> before+GA+release. > >>>> > >>>>> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing > >>>>> > >>>> the > >>>> > >>>>> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version > >>>>> > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>>> our official announcement. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Just seen it :-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I've created a Confluence page to collect
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Thanks a lot Andrea! Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? WBR, Maxim (from mobile, sorry for the typos) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Hi, > > I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a > future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I have question regarding site generation. > > > > I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > 8.0.0-released.md > > But news for 2018 are not being generated > > > > Is there any debugger I can use? > > Or maybe I miss something? > > > > Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > > > > > Hi Korbinian, > > > > > > no problem at all! > > > > > > With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > improve > > > deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core > Ajax > > > handling. > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > > > > >> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > > >> > > >> see comment here: > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > >> > > >> A solution to it is provided :) > > >> > > >> > > >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > >> > > >>> Von: "Sven Meier" > > >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > > >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will > be > > >>>> > > >>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > >>> > > >>> Yes I think so. > > >>> > > >>> Sven > > >>> > > >>> Gesendet mit Blue > > >>> > > >>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < > > solomax...@gmail.com > > >>> > > > >>> schrieb: > > >>> > > >>>> Hello All, > > >>>> > > >>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. > > >>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ > > >>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" > > >>>> release > > >>>> date to be 2018-02-12 :)) > > >>>> Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with > > >>>> "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > > >>>> > > >>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will > > be > > >>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > > an.delb...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not > blocking > > >>>>> > > >>>> but > > >>>> > > >>>>> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here > > >>>>> > > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ > > >>>> before+GA+release. > > >>>> > > >>>>> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing > > >>>>> > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>>>> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final > version > > >>>>> > > >>>> of > > >>>> > > >>>>> our official announcement. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thank you. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene > > >>>>> > > >>>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Thanks a lot Andrea! Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were some bigger changes lately. WBR, Maxim (from mobile, sorry for the typos) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Hi, > > I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a > future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I have question regarding site generation. > > > > I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > 8.0.0-released.md > > But news for 2018 are not being generated > > > > Is there any debugger I can use? > > Or maybe I miss something? > > > > Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > > > > > Hi Korbinian, > > > > > > no problem at all! > > > > > > With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > improve > > > deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core > Ajax > > > handling. > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > > > > >> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > > >> > > >> see comment here: > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > >> > > >> A solution to it is provided :) > > >> > > >> > > >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > >> > > >>> Von: "Sven Meier" > > >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > > >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will > be > > >>>> > > >>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > >>> > > >>> Yes I think so. > > >>> > > >>> Sven > > >>> > > >>> Gesendet mit Blue > > >>> > > >>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < > > solomax...@gmail.com > > >>> > > > >>> schrieb: > > >>> > > >>>> Hello All, > > >>>> > > >>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. > > >>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ > > >>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" > > >>>> release > > >>>> date to be 2018-02-12 :)) > > >>>> Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with > > >>>> "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > > >>>> > > >>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will > > be > > >>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > > an.delb...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not > blocking > > >>>>> > > >>>> but > > >>>> > > >>>>> really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here > > >>>>> > > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ > > >>>> before+GA+release. > > >>>> > > >>>>> Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing > > >>>>> > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>>>> content of my post. This should help to come out with a final > version > > >>>>> > > >>>> of > > >>>> > > >>>>> our official announcement. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for 7.x branch. On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" wrote: > On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: > > Thanks a lot Andrea! > > Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > > @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > > @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? > > > I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were > some bigger changes lately. > > > > WBR, Maxim > (from mobile, sorry for the typos) > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a > > future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > > wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I have question regarding site generation. > > > > > > I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > > 8.0.0-released.md > > > But news for 2018 are not being generated > > > > > > Is there any debugger I can use? > > > Or maybe I miss something? > > > > > > Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Korbinian, > > > > > > > > no problem at all! > > > > > > > > With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > > improve > > > > deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core > > Ajax > > > > handling. > > > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > > > > > > >> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > > > >> > > > >> see comment here: > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > > >> > > > >> A solution to it is provided :) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > >> > > > >>> Von: "Sven Meier" > > > >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > > > >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > > > >>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 > will > > be > > > >>>> > > > >>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > > >>> > > > >>> Yes I think so. > > > >>> > > > >>> Sven > > > >>> > > > >>> Gesendet mit Blue > > > >>> > > > >>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < > > > solomax...@gmail.com > > > >>> > > > > >>> schrieb: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hello All, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. > > > >>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ > > > >>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically > "guess" > > > >>>> release > > > >>>> date to be 2018-02-12 :)) > > > >>>> Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with > > > >>>> "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 > will > > > be > > > >>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < > > > an.delb...@gmail.com> > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Hi, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not > > blocking > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> but > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> reall
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
+1 I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for 7.x branch. On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" wrote: On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Thanks a lot Andrea! Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were some bigger changes lately. WBR, Maxim (from mobile, sorry for the typos) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: Hi, I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: Hello All, I have question regarding site generation. I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- 8.0.0-released.md But news for 2018 are not being generated Is there any debugger I can use? Or maybe I miss something? Copyright year is also 2017 :( On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: Hi Korbinian, no problem at all! With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax handling. Sven Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ see comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 A solution to it is provided :) - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi, Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? Yes I think so. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com schrieb: Hello All, I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release date to be 2018-02-12 :)) Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ before+GA+release. Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of our official announcement. Thank you. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Just seen it :-) On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your-next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started with some personal thoughts on topic 'JS vs Wicket'. Please take them as a raw sketch, something to use for further and better exposed considerations :-) https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ before+GA+release On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Uh sorry, I'm already able to create/edit pages. On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com wrote: I'd rather use Confluence but I think I don't have enough rights to create a page. Who can grant them? On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Martin Grigorov < mgrigo...@apache.org wrote: You can use JIRA for this too. On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com wrote: Could it be a good idea to create a shared document (for example on Google Docs) to start working on non-technical questions? Not blocking but really important: - have a story to answer "Why not just use XXX.js?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java Server Side frameworks dead?" - have a story to answer "Isn't Java dead" Have a call list for when a reporter wants to have contact about Wicket 8 and its future (esp. related to questions above) Other things to consider: -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com -- WBR Maxim aka solomax -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello Kamil, be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if it works or not. - Ursprüngliche Mail - > Von: "Kamil Paśko" > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > +1 > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for 7.x >> branch. >> >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" >> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >>> >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >>> >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >>> >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >>> >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? >>> >>> >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were >>> some bigger changes lately. >>> >>> >>> >>> WBR, Maxim >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello All, >>>>> >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >>>>> >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated >>>>> >>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? >>>>> Or maybe I miss something? >>>>> >>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Korbinian, >>>>>> >>>>>> no problem at all! >>>>>> >>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to >>>> improve >>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core >>>> Ajax >>>>>> handling. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sven >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> see comment here: >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A solution to it is provided :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Von: "Sven Meier" >>>>>>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>>>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 >>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 >>> will >>>> be >>>>>>>> moved to "security updates only" mode? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes I think so. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sven >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gesendet mit Blue >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < >>>>> solomax...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> schrieb: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. >>>>>>>>> I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ >>>>>>>>> 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically >>> "guess" >>>>>>>>> release &
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Hello Kamil, > > be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if > it works or not. > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > +1 > > > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > > > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for > 7.x > >> branch. > >> > >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" > >> wrote: > >> > >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > >>> > >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > >>> > >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > >>> > >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another > "M"? > >>> > >>> > >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there > were > >>> some bigger changes lately. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> WBR, Maxim > >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a > >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > solomax...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello All, > >>>>> > >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. > >>>>> > >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md > >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? > >>>>> Or maybe I miss something? > >>>>> > >>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Korbinian, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> no problem at all! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > >>>> improve > >>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core > >>>> Ajax > >>>>>> handling. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sven > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> see comment here: > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> A solution to it is provided :) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Von: "Sven Meier" > >>>>>>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >>>>>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 > >>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 > >>> will > >>>> be > >>>>>>>> moved to &
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hello All, do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > Hello Kamil, > > > > be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > > condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count > if > > it works or not. > > > > > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > > > +1 > > > > > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > > > > > > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for > > 7.x > > >> branch. > > >> > > >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > > >>> > > >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > > >>> > > >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > > >>> > > >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another > > "M"? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there > > were > > >>> some bigger changes lately. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> WBR, Maxim > > >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>> > > >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has > a > > >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > > solomax...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hello All, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md > > >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? > > >>>>> Or maybe I miss something? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi Korbinian, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> no problem at all! > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > > >>>> improve > > >>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's > core > > >>>> Ajax > > >>>>>> handling. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Sven > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> see comment here: > > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> A solution to it is provided :) > > >>>>>>> > > &g
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the issues are solved for 8.0.0 On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Hello All, do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > Hello Kamil, > > > > be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > > condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count > if > > it works or not. > > > > > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > > > +1 > > > > > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > > > > > > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for > > 7.x > > >> branch. > > >> > > >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > > >>> > > >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > > >>> > > >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > > >>> > > >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another > > "M"? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there > > were > > >>> some bigger changes lately. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> WBR, Maxim > > >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>> > > >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has > a > > >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > > solomax...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hello All, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md > > >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? > > >>>>> Or maybe I miss something? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi Korbinian, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> no problem at all! > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to > > >>>> improve > > >>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's > core > > >>>> Ajax > > >>>>>> handling. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Sven > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> see comment here: > > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/brows
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Changed 8.0.0 to 8.0.0-M9! Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the issues > are solved for 8.0.0 > > On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: > > Hello All, > > do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? > > On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article > I > > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > > > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > > > Hello Kamil, > > > > > > be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > > > condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread > count > > if > > > it works or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > > Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > > > > > > > > > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also > for > > > 7.x > > > >> branch. > > > >> > > > >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > > > >>> > > > >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > > > >>> > > > >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > > > >>> > > > >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another > > > "M"? > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there > > > were > > > >>> some bigger changes lately. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> WBR, Maxim > > > >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene > > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it > has > > a > > > >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < > > > solomax...@gmail.com> > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Hello All, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- > > > >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md > > > >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? > > > >>>>> Or maybe I miss something? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier > > wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> Hi Korbinian, > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> no problem at all! > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can co
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
But there are few open PRs. Better merge them before the release! Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote: > Changed 8.0.0 to 8.0.0-M9! > > Martin Grigorov > Wicket Training and Consulting > Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > >> We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the >> issues >> are solved for 8.0.0 >> >> On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >> >> Hello All, >> >> do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? >> >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >> > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the >> article >> I >> > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) >> > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. >> > >> > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d >> > >> > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < >> > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >> > >> > > Hello Kamil, >> > > >> > > be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race >> > > condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread >> count >> > if >> > > it works or not. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > - Ursprüngliche Mail - >> > > > Von: "Kamil Paśko" >> > > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org >> > > > Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 >> > > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> > > >> > > > +1 >> > > > >> > > > I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also >> for >> > > 7.x >> > > >> branch. >> > > >> >> > > >> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < >> martin.grigo...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" >> > wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >> > > >>> >> > > >>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >> > > >>> >> > > >>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release >> another >> > > "M"? >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because >> there >> > > were >> > > >>> some bigger changes lately. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> WBR, Maxim >> > > >>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene >> > > wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> Hi, >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it >> has >> > a >> > > >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >> > > solomax...@gmail.com> >> > > >>>> wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> Hello All, >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >> > > >>>>> 8.0.0-released.md >> > > >>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated >> > > >>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
why not RC1 ? :) W dniu 2018-02-06 o 13:56, Martin Grigorov pisze: Changed 8.0.0 to 8.0.0-M9! Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the issues are solved for 8.0.0 On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Hello All, do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: Hello Kamil, be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if it works or not. - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Kamil Paśko" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers +1 I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for 7.x branch. On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < martin.grigo...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Thanks a lot Andrea! Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were some bigger changes lately. WBR, Maxim (from mobile, sorry for the typos) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: Hi, I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: Hello All, I have question regarding site generation. I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- 8.0.0-released.md But news for 2018 are not being generated Is there any debugger I can use? Or maybe I miss something? Copyright year is also 2017 :( On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: Hi Korbinian, no problem at all! With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax handling. Sven Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ see comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 A solution to it is provided :) - Ursprüngliche Mail ----- Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi, Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? Yes I think so. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com schrieb: Hello All, I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release date to be 2018-02-12 :)) Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ before+GA+release. Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of our official announcement. Thank you. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Just seen it :-) On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your- next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: I've created a Confluence page to collect some ideas on the non-technical tasks we should accomplish before going to roll out Wicket 8. I've started with some personal thoughts on
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Feb 6, 2018 16:24, "Kamil Paśko" wrote: why not RC1 ? :) Because then we will be one step closer to the final release. And no one really wants that :-) W dniu 2018-02-06 o 13:56, Martin Grigorov pisze: Changed 8.0.0 to 8.0.0-M9! > > Martin Grigorov > Wicket Training and Consulting > Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the issues >> are solved for 8.0.0 >> >> On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >> >> Hello All, >> >> do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? >> >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >> >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article >>> >> I >> >>> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) >>> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. >>> >>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < >>> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Kamil, >>>> >>>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race >>>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread >>>> >>> count >> >>> if >>> >>>> it works or not. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>>> >>>>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" >>>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 >>>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also >>>>>> >>>>> for >> >>> 7.x >>>> >>>>> branch. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < >>>>>> >>>>> martin.grigo...@gmail.com >> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another >>>>>>> >>>>>> "M"? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there >>>>>>> >>>>>> were >>>> >>>>> some bigger changes lately. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WBR, Maxim >>>>>>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> has >> >>> a >>> >>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> solomax...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >>>>>>>>> 8.0.0-released.md >>>>>>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generate
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I want it. You have my... umm.. keyboard! ;) W dniu 2018-02-06 o 19:41, Martin Grigorov pisze: On Feb 6, 2018 16:24, "Kamil Paśko" wrote: why not RC1 ? :) Because then we will be one step closer to the final release. And no one really wants that :-) W dniu 2018-02-06 o 13:56, Martin Grigorov pisze: Changed 8.0.0 to 8.0.0-M9! Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting Looking for a remote position with Wicket ? Contact me! https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: We need M9 on jira in order to proceed with the release. Now all the issues are solved for 8.0.0 On Feb 6, 2018 1:24 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Hello All, do we have any blockers for "the very last" M release? On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: Hello Kamil, be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if it works or not. - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Kamil Paśko" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers +1 I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for 7.x branch. On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < martin.grigo...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: Thanks a lot Andrea! Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another "M"? I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there were some bigger changes lately. WBR, Maxim (from mobile, sorry for the typos) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene wrote: Hi, I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: Hello All, I have question regarding site generation. I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- 8.0.0-released.md But news for 2018 are not being generated Is there any debugger I can use? Or maybe I miss something? Copyright year is also 2017 :( On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: Hi Korbinian, no problem at all! With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to improve deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core Ajax handling. Sven Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer patch :/ see comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6498 A solution to it is provided :) - Ursprüngliche Mail - Von: "Sven Meier" An: dev@wicket.apache.org Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 14:15:11 Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers Hi, Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? Yes I think so. Sven Gesendet mit Blue Am 1. Feb. 2018, 14:00, um 14:00, Maxim Solodovnik < solomax...@gmail.com schrieb: Hello All, I have created wicket-8 branch in wicket-site repository. I believe the main work should be done in 2018/_posts/ 2018-02-12-wicket-8.0.0-released.md file (I optimistically "guess" release date to be 2018-02-12 :)) Weanwhile I'll update quickstart generator so it will work with "archetype:generate" 3.0.0+ and snapshot builds Am I right thinking Wicket 1.5 will be discontinued and Wicket6 will be moved to "security updates only" mode? On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Andrea Del Bene < an.delb...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, I've updated Confluence page to elaborate an answer to "Not blocking but really important" TODOs for Wicket 8. The page is here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/ToDo+ before+GA+release. Please consider to work directly on my comment integrating/changing the content of my post. This should help to come out with a final version of our official announcement. Thank you. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: Just seen it :-) On 18/01/2018 20:21, Martin Grigorov wrote: https://dzone.com/articles/would-you-use-jsf-for-your- next-project This might be used for inspiration for possible questions. On Wed,
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Hi, I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. So what to do: 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared project 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy (https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all required handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / deserializer to the transfer objects 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) kind regards Tobias > Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene : > > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> Hello Kamil, >> >> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race >> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if >> it works or not. >> >> >> >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> >>> +1 >>> >>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application >>> >>> >>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for >> 7.x >>>> branch. >>>> >>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >>>>> >>>>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >>>>> >>>>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >>>>> >>>>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another >> "M"? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there >> were >>>>> some bigger changes lately. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WBR, Maxim >>>>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a >>>>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >> solomax...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >>>>>>> 8.0.0-released.md >>>>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? >>>>>>> Or maybe I miss something? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Korbinian, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> no problem at all! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to >>>>>> improve >>>>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core >>>>>> Ajax >>>>>>>> handling. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sven >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 01.02.2018 um 17:39 schrieb Korbinian Bachl: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Im really sorry Sven but I broke your defer
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" wrote: Hi, I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. So what to do: 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared project 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy (https://docs.oracle.com/ javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all required handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / deserializer to the transfer objects 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. kind regards Tobias > Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene : > > Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article I > linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> Hello Kamil, >> >> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race >> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count if >> it works or not. >> >> >> >> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" >>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 >>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >> >>> +1 >>> >>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application >>> >>> >>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for >> 7.x >>>> branch. >>>> >>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >>>>> >>>>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >>>>> >>>>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >>>>> >>>>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another >> "M"? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there >> were >>>>> some bigger changes lately. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WBR, Maxim >>>>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a >>>>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >> solomax...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >>>>>>> 8.0.0-released.md >>>>>>> But news for 2018 are not being generated >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there any debugger I can use? >>>>>>> Or maybe I miss something? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Copyright year is also 2017 :( >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Sven Meier wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Korbinian, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> no problem at all! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With the new JavaScriptFilteredHeaderResponse we can continue to >>>>>> improve >>>>>>>> deferred loading, without having to change anything in Wicket's core >>>>>> Ajax >>>>>>>> handling. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sven >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Yes it is a very short description. So what I meant is that the client side uses the dynamic proxy which executes a rest action against the server and hand over class / parameters to the endpoint. The repsonse is automatically transfered into the business object with JSON. The server however accept the rest call and delegate everything to a given service by class / parameters. The response is sent to the client. RESTRPC. :-) And I mixed up CRUD with feign client: https://projects.spring.io/spring-cloud/spring-cloud.html#spring-cloud-feign kind regards Tobias > Am 06.02.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Martin Grigorov : > > On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" > wrote: > > Hi, > > I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. > > So what to do: > > 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared project > > 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy (https://docs.oracle.com/ > javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all required > handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / deserializer to > the transfer objects > > 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) > > I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD > implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) > > > Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? > > Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. > But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. > > > kind regards > > Tobias > >> Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene : >> >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the article > I >> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) >> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. >> >> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d >> >> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: >> >>> Hello Kamil, >>> >>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race >>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread count > if >>> it works or not. >>> >>> >>> >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - >>>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org >>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application >>>> >>>> >>>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for >>> 7.x >>>>> branch. >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! >>>>>> >>>>>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( >>>>>> >>>>>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? >>>>>> >>>>>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another >>> "M"? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there >>> were >>>>>> some bigger changes lately. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> WBR, Maxim >>>>>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018, 16:25 Andrea Del Bene >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've updated copyright year. You don't see 2018 post because it has a >>>>>>> future date, but you can use flag future:true to show it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Maxim Solodovnik < >>> solomax...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have question regarding site generation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have added following file: 2018/_posts/2018-02-12-wicket- >>>>>>>> 8.0.0-released.md
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I'm happy with all latest changes (being continuously tested using our main app) I can address all Martin comments regarding #262-#264 and merge them Would it be OK? Can we start release process after this merging? On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:12 AM, Tobias Soloschenko < tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Yes it is a very short description. > > So what I meant is that the client side uses the dynamic proxy which > executes a rest action against the server and hand over class / parameters > to the endpoint. The repsonse is automatically transfered into the business > object with JSON. The server however accept the rest call and delegate > everything to a given service by class / parameters. The response is sent > to the client. RESTRPC. :-) > > And I mixed up CRUD with feign client: > > https://projects.spring.io/spring-cloud/spring-cloud. > html#spring-cloud-feign > > kind regards > > Tobias > > > Am 06.02.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Martin Grigorov < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com>: > > > > On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" < > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. > > > > So what to do: > > > > 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared > project > > > > 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy (https://docs.oracle.com/ > > javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all required > > handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / deserializer to > > the transfer objects > > > > 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) > > > > I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD > > implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) > > > > > > Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? > > > > Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. > > But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. > > > > > > kind regards > > > > Tobias > > > >> Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene : > >> > >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the > article > > I > >> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and funny) > >> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > >> > >> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > >> > >> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> > >>> Hello Kamil, > >>> > >>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > >>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread > count > > if > >>> it works or not. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > >>>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also for > >>> 7.x > >>>>> branch. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Not sure if I can do more for the site update :( > >>>>>> > >>>>>> @Martijn maybe you can provide text for the upcoming release? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> @All, I'm not real fan of it, but maybe it worth to release another > >>> "M"? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think it would be better to release another M or RC because there > >>> were > >>>>>> some bigger changes lately. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> WBR, Maxim > >>>>>> (from mobile, sorry for the typos
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I've also tested last snapshot with my main app and everything seems ok. On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: > I'm happy with all latest changes (being continuously tested using our main > app) > I can address all Martin comments regarding #262-#264 and merge them > > Would it be OK? > Can we start release process after this merging? > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:12 AM, Tobias Soloschenko < > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Yes it is a very short description. > > > > So what I meant is that the client side uses the dynamic proxy which > > executes a rest action against the server and hand over class / > parameters > > to the endpoint. The repsonse is automatically transfered into the > business > > object with JSON. The server however accept the rest call and delegate > > everything to a given service by class / parameters. The response is sent > > to the client. RESTRPC. :-) > > > > And I mixed up CRUD with feign client: > > > > https://projects.spring.io/spring-cloud/spring-cloud. > > html#spring-cloud-feign > > > > kind regards > > > > Tobias > > > > > Am 06.02.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Martin Grigorov < > > martin.grigo...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" < > > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. > > > > > > So what to do: > > > > > > 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared > > project > > > > > > 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy (https://docs.oracle.com/ > > > javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all > required > > > handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / deserializer > to > > > the transfer objects > > > > > > 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) > > > > > > I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD > > > implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) > > > > > > > > > Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? > > > > > > Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. > > > But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. > > > > > > > > > kind regards > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > >> Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene >: > > >> > > >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the > > article > > > I > > >> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and > funny) > > >> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > >> > > >> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > >> > > >> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hello Kamil, > > >>> > > >>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > > >>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread > > count > > > if > > >>> it works or not. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > >>>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > >>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > >>> > > >>>> +1 > > >>>> > > >>>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> I'm for a new release too. We have a lot of fixes to release also > for > > >>> 7.x > > >>>>> branch. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 11:50 AM, "Martin Grigorov" < > > martin.grigo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2018 09:03, "Maxim Solodovnik" > > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks a lot Andrea! > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Not sure
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
Time to release? : On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote: > I've also tested last snapshot with my main app and everything seems ok. > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > wrote: > > > I'm happy with all latest changes (being continuously tested using our > main > > app) > > I can address all Martin comments regarding #262-#264 and merge them > > > > Would it be OK? > > Can we start release process after this merging? > > > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:12 AM, Tobias Soloschenko < > > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > Yes it is a very short description. > > > > > > So what I meant is that the client side uses the dynamic proxy which > > > executes a rest action against the server and hand over class / > > parameters > > > to the endpoint. The repsonse is automatically transfered into the > > business > > > object with JSON. The server however accept the rest call and delegate > > > everything to a given service by class / parameters. The response is > sent > > > to the client. RESTRPC. :-) > > > > > > And I mixed up CRUD with feign client: > > > > > > https://projects.spring.io/spring-cloud/spring-cloud. > > > html#spring-cloud-feign > > > > > > kind regards > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > Am 06.02.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Martin Grigorov < > > > martin.grigo...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" < > > > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. > > > > > > > > So what to do: > > > > > > > > 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared > > > project > > > > > > > > 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy ( > https://docs.oracle.com/ > > > > javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all > > required > > > > handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / > deserializer > > to > > > > the transfer objects > > > > > > > > 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) > > > > > > > > I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD > > > > implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) > > > > > > > > > > > > Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? > > > > > > > > Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. > > > > But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. > > > > > > > > > > > > kind regards > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > >> Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene < > an.delb...@gmail.com > > >: > > > >> > > > >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the > > > article > > > > I > > > >> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and > > funny) > > > >> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > > >> > > > >> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > > > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Hello Kamil, > > > >>> > > > >>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a race > > > >>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client thread > > > count > > > > if > > > >>> it works or not. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> - Ursprüngliche Mail - > > > >>>> Von: "Kamil Paśko" > > > >>>> An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > > >>>> Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 21:31:43 > > > >>>> Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > >>> > > > >>>> +1 > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I could test this "deferred javascript" issue on real application > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > >
Re: 8.0.0 blockers
I can start the release process if there is no objection. On Feb 10, 2018 5:00 AM, "Maxim Solodovnik" wrote: > Time to release? : > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Andrea Del Bene > wrote: > > > I've also tested last snapshot with my main app and everything seems ok. > > > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Maxim Solodovnik > > wrote: > > > > > I'm happy with all latest changes (being continuously tested using our > > main > > > app) > > > I can address all Martin comments regarding #262-#264 and merge them > > > > > > Would it be OK? > > > Can we start release process after this merging? > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:12 AM, Tobias Soloschenko < > > > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Yes it is a very short description. > > > > > > > > So what I meant is that the client side uses the dynamic proxy which > > > > executes a rest action against the server and hand over class / > > > parameters > > > > to the endpoint. The repsonse is automatically transfered into the > > > business > > > > object with JSON. The server however accept the rest call and > delegate > > > > everything to a given service by class / parameters. The response is > > sent > > > > to the client. RESTRPC. :-) > > > > > > > > And I mixed up CRUD with feign client: > > > > > > > > https://projects.spring.io/spring-cloud/spring-cloud. > > > > html#spring-cloud-feign > > > > > > > > kind regards > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > > > Am 06.02.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Martin Grigorov < > > > > martin.grigo...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 6, 2018 21:45, "Tobias Soloschenko" < > > > > tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I also like REST in combination with type safe interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > So what to do: > > > > > > > > > > 1. Put the type safe interfaces and transfer objects into a shared > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > 2. Build a rest call within a dynamic proxy ( > > https://docs.oracle.com/ > > > > > javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/reflection/proxy.html) with all > > > required > > > > > handlings at one place - JSON can be used as serializer / > > deserializer > > > to > > > > > the transfer objects > > > > > > > > > > 3. Invoke and have fun ;-) > > > > > > > > > > I think that is basically all what the spring framework CRUD > > > > > implementations are (of course with a bit more spring magic) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which Spring CRUD implementations do you mean? > > > > > > > > > > Your explanation above is closer to RPC than to REST. > > > > > But the explanation is too short so I might have misunderstood you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kind regards > > > > > > > > > > Tobias > > > > > > > > > >> Am 05.02.2018 um 11:39 schrieb Andrea Del Bene < > > an.delb...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > >> > > > > >> Another interesting source for official statements/answers is the > > > > article > > > > > I > > > > >> linked at the bottom of this message. It contains some good (and > > > funny) > > > > >> critics to REST and what it promises to deliver. > > > > >> > > > > >> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/rest-is-the-new-soap-97ff6c09896d > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Korbinian Bachl < > > > > >> korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Hello Kamil, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> be careful when using this feature in production as there is a > race > > > > >>> condition meaning it depends on network, browser and client > thread > > > > count > > > > > if > > > > >>> it works or not. &
