Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: +1 (non-binding) -- timothy
RE: what wicket is (was: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
> The model sounds cool, but I don't happen to like it. Fair enough. :-) There are several projects in the Incubator for which I could personally say the same thing. But other ASF Members like them, and that's all good. :-) With respect to Wicket, well I happen to like JavaServer Pages, so you can imagine my thoughts on the topic. ;-) But then see above. :-) --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Yoav Shapira wrote: Congratulations and good luck to the wicket team ;) +1 (binding) :) Alex Yoav On 8/28/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 :) -Igor On 8/28/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Welcome Wicket! > > Thanks a lot everyone! Looking forward to start incubation. > > Eelco > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Congratulations and good luck to the wicket team ;) Yoav On 8/28/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 :) -Igor On 8/28/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Welcome Wicket! > > Thanks a lot everyone! Looking forward to start incubation. > > Eelco > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 :) -Igor On 8/28/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Welcome Wicket! Thanks a lot everyone! Looking forward to start incubation. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Welcome Wicket! Thanks a lot everyone! Looking forward to start incubation. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
The vote has now, IMO, had enough time to run. To summarise, we had 8 binding +1s, from Leo Simons, Alex Karasulu, Jason van Zyl, Justin Erenkrantz, Don Brown, Yoav Shapira, Robert Burrell Donkin, Upayavira, and one binding -0 from Greg Stein. We also had eight non-binding +1s. This means that this proposal has passed, and Wicket is now free to join the Apache Incubator. Welcome Wicket! Some ICLAs have already started rolling in. I shall now get on with requesting the necessary infrastructure. Regards, Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Oops. I guess I should vote :-) [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling Upayavira Upayavira wrote: > Folks, > > Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a > vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. > > As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to > approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 > > Below is the complete proposal for this project. > > So, please cast your votes: > > [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: > > Regards, Upayavira > > - o - > > = Wicket Proposal = > > This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project > within the Apache Software Foundation. > > == Rationale == > > Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing > plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in > it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to > it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good > match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining > a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and > vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to > continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we > hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other > Apache projects. > > The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software > Foundation for several reasons: > > * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an > increased visibility and acceptance. > > * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure > and legal protection. > > * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for > many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get > togethers etc. > > * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as > Felix or Jetspeed. > > * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we > hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. > > * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an > innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. > > == Criteria == > > === Community === > > Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to > everyone. It is released > under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the > maximum possible adoption by all > potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages > suggestions and > contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined > as contributors > since the project's inception in 2004. > > === Meritocracy === > > Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it > was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and > Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to > join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The > project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan > Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the > project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then > having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), > and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project > members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals > contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. > > == Scope of Sub projects == > > Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several > distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that > are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes > a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. > One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual > purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, > while still having a place to put interesting components and utility > classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where > components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the > core project. > > Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion > tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an > individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to > ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are > knowledgeable enough to change. > > == Features == > > Wicket is a Java web application framework that takes simplicity, > separation of concerns and ease of development to a whole new level. > Wicket pages can be mocked up, previewed and later revised using > standard WYSIWYG HT
Re: Re: -1 votes on proposals need no explanation was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/25/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Upayavira wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >> FYI: this is a majority vote not subject to vetos. So, there's no >> requirement that you provide a reason for voting against it - just >> like you don't have to provide a reason why you're voting for it. If >> you want to provide a reason, great, but I could just vote against it >> without further comment and that's perfectly fine too. -- justin > > Okay. Thanks for the clarification. I'll try to remember that for the > next podling I propose :-) Although... an explanation can go a long way to have other pmc members consider the issues, good and bad, that they might have overlooked. +1 anyone feel like stepping up to add the content of this thread to http://incubator.apache.org/guides/pmc.html...? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what wicket is (was: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 04:46:13AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: > >Whether this is the right way to do things is > >debatable, but I would say now is not the right time for the incubator to > >start > >having those kinds of debates. > > I'm not trying to start a debate, nor engaging in any debate. I > offered my opinion. C'mon greg, opinions that are not shared often start a debate! Offering an opinion without wanting follow-up is kinda hard around here... > The model sounds cool, but I don't happen to like > it. I am fine explaining offlist cuz it really is irrelevant here, as > you note. > > >Various ASF members like working this way, are > >working this way, and are backing this proposal. Trust darwinism. > > More power to 'em. I get a vote just like any other Incubator PMC > member. Please don't attempt to deny me that. Wouldn't dare. You said something which read to me like "+0 pending FOO" and my "trust darwinism" was ment more as a "don't worry about the 'pending' stuff or reading my whole e-mail in detail, we'll be fine anyhow". I'm such an arse with words. > Just because I didn't +1 > the proposal doesn't mean you should try to coerce me into changing my > vote. Not trying to. But like anyone on this planet, the co-operative process we use says that I'm completely free to try to if I wanted. If I was a wicket developer and totally convinced of how it absolutely is the best thing since sliced bread I would probably try to do that. Which is very much a healthy response. Evangelism, baby! > Darwin also says that proposals could be voted down :-) (but > I'm not even doing that... it's just a -0 for cryin' out loud) Sssh! Speak softly, or you might provoke more discussion! :-P > To be honest, I am rather amazed at the amount of text written because > one single person votes -0 rather than +1. Seriously... wow. God > forbid somebody votes -1. What happens then? Ten times as many words > written to convince them of the error of their ways? What are we > saying to people: don't vote anything but +1 or your inbox will get > slammed? Follow the groupmind, or you shall be mailbombed? Personally, > I'd prefer an environment MUCH more accepting of alternate votes -- > that means you'll actually *get* those votes, rather than people being > quiet, too afraid to counter the majority. You didn't just -1 or -0, you did so conditionally on not having some kind of understanding of differences or something. I didn't care much for the actual vote (its going to get in anyway), but the conditional was interesting to me. I figured the same conditional might be true for other people as well (wicket simply is a bit weird, and I'd just spent time figuring out *how* it is weird) so it was quite worthy to spend an e-mail on it irrespective of any vote going on. I personally couldn't be more accepting of -1s, especially when it concerns things I don't have a stake in, haven't worked on, and haven't proposed, and if this really is an environment that isn't similary accepting we should change that, but I hardly see a mailbomb around here. Of course, we might have one now because of self-fulfilling prophecy and all that ;) *ducks* LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what wicket is (was: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
On 8/25/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Wicket *is* different. Excellent. Thanks a bunch for the thorough reply and comparison points. Very helpful. Whether this is the right way to do things is debatable, but I would say now is not the right time for the incubator to start having those kinds of debates. I'm not trying to start a debate, nor engaging in any debate. I offered my opinion. The model sounds cool, but I don't happen to like it. I am fine explaining offlist cuz it really is irrelevant here, as you note. Various ASF members like working this way, are working this way, and are backing this proposal. Trust darwinism. More power to 'em. I get a vote just like any other Incubator PMC member. Please don't attempt to deny me that. Just because I didn't +1 the proposal doesn't mean you should try to coerce me into changing my vote. Darwin also says that proposals could be voted down :-) (but I'm not even doing that... it's just a -0 for cryin' out loud) To be honest, I am rather amazed at the amount of text written because one single person votes -0 rather than +1. Seriously... wow. God forbid somebody votes -1. What happens then? Ten times as many words written to convince them of the error of their ways? What are we saying to people: don't vote anything but +1 or your inbox will get slammed? Follow the groupmind, or you shall be mailbombed? Personally, I'd prefer an environment MUCH more accepting of alternate votes -- that means you'll actually *get* those votes, rather than people being quiet, too afraid to counter the majority. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what wicket is (was: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
Greg, Basically wicket creates a session for every user and then attaches a java object graph to that session, with parts shared between sessions. Then there are some mechanisms for attaching "id"-ed objects in that graph to "id"-ed elements in an HTML template, and rendering directions for the "merge" between the template and the object graph. Basically you have java developers pretending the web is like swing (eg stateful UI), web designers designing the "fluff" around the "active UI" bits, and then various kinds of magic in the middle to make that work. Why, one might even say its a little bit like the google web toolkit, except its also a little bit more "full stack" like ruby on rails, and fully open source. The template language made me think of kid (you know the python one), only its a lot simpler and doesn't allow embedding of source code. Or like .net web development without ASP and visual basic. Of course, once you have a java object graph with all your data in it, using some kind of object persistence thing (probably using OR mapping) is the next step towards not having to think about the web and just doing java development. Wicket goes quite far that way; you don't even need to know how to write XML files or even valid XHTML in order to use it. And making things "AJAX" is all but transparent (since the request/response is hidden, making it into another kind of request/response is not so difficult). Its uber cool if you want to make java developers build web applications quickly. Its not so cool if you want to use XSLT or similar stuff (use cocoon), process 100s of megabytes of XML documents (use cocoon), or want some kind of java-ish programming model which still keeps request/response somewhere in there (use struts or a similar action-based framework), or want efficient memory use scaling up to 1000s of concurrent users (in which case, don't put any state in java objects and don't use any framework like any of these, in fact, anything servlet-based kinda sucks automatically). The project at the ASF that comes closest is tapestry, but I haven't ever fully understood what tapestry actually is (I know it builds on hivemind which is somewhat like excalibur/avalon/osgi automatically making it different from wicket since wicket is not "IOC"), so I can't comment further. Wicket *is* different. Whether this is the right way to do things is debatable, but I would say now is not the right time for the incubator to start having those kinds of debates. Various ASF members like working this way, are working this way, and are backing this proposal. Trust darwinism. LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: -1 votes on proposals need no explanation was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Upayavira wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >> FYI: this is a majority vote not subject to vetos. So, there's no >> requirement that you provide a reason for voting against it - just >> like you don't have to provide a reason why you're voting for it. If >> you want to provide a reason, great, but I could just vote against it >> without further comment and that's perfectly fine too. -- justin > > Okay. Thanks for the clarification. I'll try to remember that for the > next podling I propose :-) Although... an explanation can go a long way to have other pmc members consider the issues, good and bad, that they might have overlooked. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: -1 votes on proposals need no explanation was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling >> [ ] 0 Don't care >> [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: > > FYI: this is a majority vote not subject to vetos. So, there's no > requirement that you provide a reason for voting against it - just > like you don't have to provide a reason why you're voting for it. If > you want to provide a reason, great, but I could just vote against it > without further comment and that's perfectly fine too. -- justin Okay. Thanks for the clarification. I'll try to remember that for the next podling I propose :-) Regards, Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Upayavira wrote: [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling +1, non-binding Ross - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
I didn't object... I voted -0 based on the information I was pointed out, which (as you said) is not a very good comparison point. *shrug* Sorry if I came across too strongly. Igor pointed out my reply had a bit of a zealous tone to it. My only goal was to explain the idea behind Wicket a bit. :) Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... I'm developing a desktop application. You can object to the importance we give to providing a clean OO model, and argue that our tradeoffs are ill chosen, but I believe Wicket fills a gap in the web framework sphere. I didn't object... I voted -0 based on the information I was pointed out, which (as you said) is not a very good comparison point. *shrug* Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Greg Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/24/06, Ersin Er <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> Wicket vs. Struts: http://www.wicket-wiki.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Struts
Bleh. That page confuses a lot of things. It conflates disparate
components (e.g. Struts and JSP) in order to form opinions.
As the note on top of the article states, it was not written by any
team member of Wicket.
If you are interested in my take amongst some other frameworks on
this, you can find it here:
http://www.virtuas.com/articles/webframework-sweetspots.html
It appears
that Wicket also does state management "as a benefit" which I've
rarely found to be true (any state in your http server kills
scalability).
Most competing frameworks are 'optimized' for that scalability as
their number 1 concern. That works *if* scalability is your number 1
concern, like the Googles, Amazons and other large public facing web
sites. However, if you are developing systems for just a couple of
(tens of) thousand users, where the load is predictable etc, you might
as well focus on other issues than merely scalability. Wicket focusses
first on the development model and only in the second case, as an
optimization, gives you the tools to tune your application for
scalability.
Two years ago I was looking for a framework that would scale better
for development. A framework that would let us utilize reuse like we
were used to with e.g. Swing. A framework that would save our projects
from all the hacks, ad-hock session usage etc that inevitably popped
up when the UI get more complex. A framework that would help our
junior programmers learn object orientation instead of learning just
about every bad programming habit one can image. A framework that
would allow us to hire HTML/CSS guys with their own tools for the
layout etc and leave the programming to programmers. A framework that
would have more means of breaking functionality up in smaller pieces
so that for a change we would end up with something maintainable after
spending a couple of man years building. Those were real, urgent
problems that needed to be addressed and that the (model 2) frameworks
we were using at that time didn't address (in fact they made things
worse). With Wicket I found a framework with a solution to these
problems.
On a pro, it seems to talk smack about JSP. Good. On a con, it uses a
lot of buzzwords to try to demonstrate superiority. I don't know how
"Wicket is fully object-oriented. You work with hierarchies of
components and design your application as such. There is no need to
bend your oo design to fit with the request-response nature of the
HTTP protocol." will really help. The web *is* request/response.
This is akin to the objections people up to today make to ORM
frameworks like Hibernate. They say you shouldn't try to bend OO
design to fit the relational nature of databases. In this case too,
it's a matter of optimization; staying close to the metal gives you
the best options to optimize, but using an ORM framework or component
framework provides you with a superior programming model.
I'm sad people feel we are trying to sell Wicket with a bunch of buzz
words. We hoped we were doing better than that, and in fact feel that
by swimming against the current in many areas, going for the cheap
sell is the last thing we did. Anyway, the 'OO programming model' part
is really important to us. The framework was started by Jonathan
(previously worked for Microsoft as a Java evangelist, worked amongst
other things Visual J++, switched to SUN to work on AWT and Swing)
who, when starting out for his first web application with Java, was
appalled by the fact that there was no framework, out of all the 50 or
so he found, that allowed him to just simply program like he could do
with Swing. JSF, Echo and Tapestry came close to his goals as at least
they know component reuse and state management, but he still missed
the 'simply Java' part. So he decided to scratch his own itch and
created Wicket.
With object oriented programming we mean something simple really, like:
public class MyComponent extends SomeOtherComponent { ...
or
public class ClickPanel extends Panel {
private int count = 0;
public ClickPanel(MarkupContainer parent, String id) {
Link l = new Link(this, "link") {
public void onClick() {
count++;
}
};
new Label(l, "label", new PropertyModel(this, "count"));
}
That's all you have to do to create a new component, and if it is
available in your class path, it's available for use with no other
requirements. Personally, I favor this way of programming over having
to be aware of the underlying protocol all the time, just as I would
favor not to bother with the event loop of the operating system when
I'm developing a desktop application. You can object to the importance
we give to providing a clean OO model, and argue that our tradeoffs
are ill chosen, but I believe Wicket fills a gap in the web framework
sphere.
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 (non-binding) On 8/24/06, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, +1. Yoav On 8/24/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 > > On 8/24/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So, please cast your votes: > > > > > > [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > > > [ ] 0 Don't care > > > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Hi, +1. Yoav On 8/24/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: +1 On 8/24/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, please cast your votes: > > > > [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > > [ ] 0 Don't care > > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-1 votes on proposals need no explanation was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: FYI: this is a majority vote not subject to vetos. So, there's no requirement that you provide a reason for voting against it - just like you don't have to provide a reason why you're voting for it. If you want to provide a reason, great, but I could just vote against it without further comment and that's perfectly fine too. -- justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 On 8/24/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, please cast your votes: > > [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, please cast your votes: [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Joining Incubator PMC (was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > ...Not sure if binding or not, I've signed up as a mentor for Wicket but > didn't participate in incubator activities before. Currently non-binding. But, as an ASF member, you should ask the Incubator PMC to join. Once you've joined, your votes will become binding. (at least that is my understanding) Ok, here it goes then: I'd like to join the incubator PMC if you guys want me. I tend to have an overstuffed schedule, so can't promise much involvement besides helping with Wicket incubation as a mentor. But I'm happy to help when I manage to find some time. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joining Incubator PMC (was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> ...=== Name === >> >> Obviously, the >> ... > > Looks like something's missing on that line, it ends after "Obviously, > the". Not having a good day. That was where I started saying that I'd done a US trademark search that showed nothing, but decided not to mention it. > Apart from that: +1. > > Not sure if binding or not, I've signed up as a mentor for Wicket but > didn't participate in incubator activities before. Currently non-binding. But, as an ASF member, you should ask the Incubator PMC to join. Once you've joined, your votes will become binding. (at least that is my understanding) Regards, Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ...=== Name === Obviously, the ... Looks like something's missing on that line, it ends after "Obviously, the". Apart from that: +1. Not sure if binding or not, I've signed up as a mentor for Wicket but didn't participate in incubator activities before. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 On 24 Aug 06, at 3:02 AM 24 Aug 06, Upayavira wrote: Folks, Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/ index.html#08808 Below is the complete proposal for this project. So, please cast your votes: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: Regards, Upayavira - o - = Wicket Proposal = This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project within the Apache Software Foundation. == Rationale == Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other Apache projects. The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software Foundation for several reasons: * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an increased visibility and acceptance. * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure and legal protection. * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get togethers etc. * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as Felix or Jetspeed. * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. == Criteria == === Community === Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to everyone. It is released under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the maximum possible adoption by all potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages suggestions and contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined as contributors since the project's inception in 2004. === Meritocracy === Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. == Scope of Sub projects == Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, while still having a place to put interesting components and utility classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the core project. Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are knowledgeable enough to change. == Features == Wicket is a Java web application framework that takes simplicity, separation of concerns and ease of development to a whole new level. Wicket pages can be mocked up, previewed and later revised using standard WYSIWYG HTML design tools. Dynamic content processing and form handling is all handled in Java code using a first-class component model backed by POJO data beans that can easily be persisted using your favorite technology. == Initia
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Upayavira wrote: So, please cast your votes: [X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: +1 Alex - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
[X] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling /Gwyn P.S. We'll be happy to discuss "Why Wicket" or the Wicket homepage & marketing-speak, but I don't think this thread's the place to do it! -- Download Wicket 1.2.1 now! - http://wicketframework.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
I've never used Wicket, but I've done a fair number of webapps using similar component frameworks, such as WebObjects and Tapestry. All I can say - it is hard to argue about component frameworks with people who never used them. The benefit is essentially a different more developer-friendly abstraction. Of course it ties to the request/ response protocol. Wicket site does seem to be heavy on marketing talk. While I find it very annoying (although this probably serves them in converting the masses), this doesn't mean it is a bad framework :-) Andrus On Aug 24, 2006, at 3:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On 8/24/06, Ersin Er <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Wicket vs. Struts: http://www.wicket-wiki.org.uk/wiki/index.php/ Struts Bleh. That page confuses a lot of things. It conflates disparate components (e.g. Struts and JSP) in order to form opinions. It appears that Wicket also does state management "as a benefit" which I've rarely found to be true (any state in your http server kills scalability). And it somehow argues that Struts cannot handle multiple components on a page because they all go to one response handler for actions? Euh... seems each component would specify its own handler. On a pro, it seems to talk smack about JSP. Good. On a con, it uses a lot of buzzwords to try to demonstrate superiority. I don't know how "Wicket is fully object-oriented. You work with hierarchies of components and design your application as such. There is no need to bend your oo design to fit with the request-response nature of the HTTP protocol." will really help. The web *is* request/response. Whatever. ETIMEOUT. -0 (binding) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On 8/24/06, Ersin Er <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Wicket vs. Struts: http://www.wicket-wiki.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Struts Bleh. That page confuses a lot of things. It conflates disparate components (e.g. Struts and JSP) in order to form opinions. It appears that Wicket also does state management "as a benefit" which I've rarely found to be true (any state in your http server kills scalability). And it somehow argues that Struts cannot handle multiple components on a page because they all go to one response handler for actions? Euh... seems each component would specify its own handler. On a pro, it seems to talk smack about JSP. Good. On a con, it uses a lot of buzzwords to try to demonstrate superiority. I don't know how "Wicket is fully object-oriented. You work with hierarchies of components and design your application as such. There is no need to bend your oo design to fit with the request-response nature of the HTTP protocol." will really help. The web *is* request/response. Whatever. ETIMEOUT. -0 (binding) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On Thursday 24 August 2006 18:16, Greg Stein wrote: > I would be interested in a comparison of Wicket to things like Struts, > Jetspeed, Cocoon, or whatever other Apache project might be reasonable > compared-against. I've got no problem with Wicket beating the pants > off every other Apache project, but what is it that makes it uber > cool? What *precisely*? I think each Wicket supporter has their own pet features. Mine are; * No XML! * Pure HTML for styling/templating. * True re-usable, stackable components. * Elegant design - Proper use of classloaders. - Hooks for anything one can think of. - Properly defined lifecycles. - Designed for extendability, yet very restrictive in subclassing. - Programing model is similar to GUI/Swing/SWT. * Fabulous community, at par with (or better than) the best here in ASF. No single, benevolent dictator as many others. Cheers Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 Mvgr, Martin Upayavira wrote: Folks, Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 Below is the complete proposal for this project. So, please cast your votes: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: Regards, Upayavira - o - = Wicket Proposal = This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project within the Apache Software Foundation. == Rationale == Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other Apache projects. The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software Foundation for several reasons: * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an increased visibility and acceptance. * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure and legal protection. * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get togethers etc. * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as Felix or Jetspeed. * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. == Criteria == === Community === Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to everyone. It is released under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the maximum possible adoption by all potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages suggestions and contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined as contributors since the project's inception in 2004. === Meritocracy === Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. == Scope of Sub projects == Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, while still having a place to put interesting components and utility classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the core project. Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are knowledgeable enough to change. == Features == Wicket is a Java web application framework that takes simplicity, separation of concerns and ease of development to a whole new level. Wicket pages can be mocked up, previewed and later revised using standard WYSIWYG HTML design tools. Dynamic content processing and form handling is all handled in Java code using a first-class component model backed by POJO data beans that can easily be persisted using your favorite technology. == Initial Source == The source for Wicket that is to be imported is currently within
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Hi, I am sure Wicket folks can give more detailed explanations but I want to say that Wicket has the most elegant approach to web development I have ever seen. Wicket (and may be other very similar ones) is the only framework which seperates code and ui _truely_. Other projects of course have their own advantages, say integration possiblities for example, but Wicket is my choice. And here is: Wicket vs. Struts: http://www.wicket-wiki.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Struts and Wicket vs. Tapestry: http://www.wicket-wiki.org.uk/wiki/index.php/For_Tapestry_Users And I like more code oriented approach of Wicket where UI is only UI. This goes much better with the development cycle for me. ( and of course +1 (non-binding) ) Cheers, -- Ersin On 8/24/06, Greg Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Java web frameworks tend to be a dime a dozen, and they all talk about their "simplicity". Every one of them. Then I sat thru a Struts presentation. Gah. I would be interested in a comparison of Wicket to things like Struts, Jetspeed, Cocoon, or whatever other Apache project might be reasonable compared-against. I've got no problem with Wicket beating the pants off every other Apache project, but what is it that makes it uber cool? What *precisely*? Pending that, consider me +0 (binding) Cheers, -g On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Folks, > > Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a > vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. > > As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to > approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 > > Below is the complete proposal for this project. > > So, please cast your votes: > > [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: > > Regards, Upayavira > > - o - > > = Wicket Proposal = > > This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project > within the Apache Software Foundation. > > == Rationale == > > Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing > plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in > it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to > it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good > match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining > a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and > vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to > continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we > hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other > Apache projects. > > The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software > Foundation for several reasons: > > * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an > increased visibility and acceptance. > > * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure > and legal protection. > > * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for > many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get > togethers etc. > > * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as > Felix or Jetspeed. > > * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we > hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. > > * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an > innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. > > == Criteria == > > === Community === > > Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to > everyone. It is released > under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the > maximum possible adoption by all > potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages > suggestions and > contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined > as contributors > since the project's inception in 2004. > > === Meritocracy === > > Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it > was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and > Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to > join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The > project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan > Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the > project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then > having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), > and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project > members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals > contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. > > == Scope of Sub projects == > > Wicket is distributed
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Java web frameworks tend to be a dime a dozen, and they all talk about their "simplicity". Every one of them. Then I sat thru a Struts presentation. Gah. I would be interested in a comparison of Wicket to things like Struts, Jetspeed, Cocoon, or whatever other Apache project might be reasonable compared-against. I've got no problem with Wicket beating the pants off every other Apache project, but what is it that makes it uber cool? What *precisely*? Pending that, consider me +0 (binding) Cheers, -g On 8/24/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Folks, Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 Below is the complete proposal for this project. So, please cast your votes: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: Regards, Upayavira - o - = Wicket Proposal = This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project within the Apache Software Foundation. == Rationale == Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other Apache projects. The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software Foundation for several reasons: * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an increased visibility and acceptance. * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure and legal protection. * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get togethers etc. * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as Felix or Jetspeed. * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. == Criteria == === Community === Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to everyone. It is released under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the maximum possible adoption by all potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages suggestions and contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined as contributors since the project's inception in 2004. === Meritocracy === Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. == Scope of Sub projects == Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, while still having a place to put interesting components and utility classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the core project. Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are knowledgeable enough to change. == Features =
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:02:53AM -0700, Upayavira wrote: > Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a > vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. > = Wicket Proposal = > > This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project > within the Apache Software Foundation. > > == Rationale == > > Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing > plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in > it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to > it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good > match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining > a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and > vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to > continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we > hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other > Apache projects. +1 LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 (non-binding) regards, Martin On 8/24/06, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thursday 24 August 2006 15:02, Upayavira wrote: > So, please cast your votes: > [x] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling (non-binding) Cheers Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
On Thursday 24 August 2006 15:02, Upayavira wrote: > So, please cast your votes: > [x] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling (non-binding) Cheers Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oops (was Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
Searching for '[VOTE]' on the wicket archives isn't enough to find the relevant vote :-( Here's the correct link: http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08853 Upayavira Upayavira wrote: > Folks, > > Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a > vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. > > As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to > approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 > > Below is the complete proposal for this project. > > So, please cast your votes: > > [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: > > Regards, Upayavira > > - o - > > = Wicket Proposal = > > This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project > within the Apache Software Foundation. > > == Rationale == > > Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing > plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in > it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to > it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good > match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining > a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and > vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to > continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we > hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other > Apache projects. > > The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software > Foundation for several reasons: > > * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an > increased visibility and acceptance. > > * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure > and legal protection. > > * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for > many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get > togethers etc. > > * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as > Felix or Jetspeed. > > * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we > hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. > > * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an > innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. > > == Criteria == > > === Community === > > Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to > everyone. It is released > under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the > maximum possible adoption by all > potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages > suggestions and > contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined > as contributors > since the project's inception in 2004. > > === Meritocracy === > > Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it > was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and > Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to > join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The > project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan > Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the > project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then > having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), > and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project > members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals > contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. > > == Scope of Sub projects == > > Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several > distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that > are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes > a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. > One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual > purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, > while still having a place to put interesting components and utility > classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where > components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the > core project. > > Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion > tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an > individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to > ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are > knowledgeable enough to change. > > == Features == > > Wicket is a Java web application framework that takes simplicity, > separation of concerns and ease of de
Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
+1 (non binding) -- Download Wicket 1.2.1 now! Embed Wicket components in your portals! -- http://wicketframework.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator
Folks, Without further ado (and before my PC dies again), I'd like to call a vote on accepting Wicket into the incubator. As previously mentioned, the Wicket community held a unanimous vote to approach the incubator. The vote thread is here: http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net/index.html#08808 Below is the complete proposal for this project. So, please cast your votes: [ ] +1 Accept Wicket as an Incubator podling [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Reject this proposal for the following reason: Regards, Upayavira - o - = Wicket Proposal = This proposal outlines the creation of a new top-level Wicket project within the Apache Software Foundation. == Rationale == Wicket is a unique web application framework that focusses on bringing plain object oriented Java programming to the web tier. It is unique in it's focus amongst the (many) web frameworks that exist today. Due to it's unmanaged nature and reliance on plain Java, it is a very good match for frameworks like OSGi and Eclipse RSP. Wicket has been gaining a very steady increase in popularity, and with two books coming out and vastly improved new releases we are working on, we expect this trend to continue. We consider moving to Apache being an additional boost, and we hope it will open the way for possible future cooperation with other Apache projects. The maintainers of Wicket are interested in joining the Apache Software Foundation for several reasons: * Apache has a widely recognized name, which will help Wicket get an increased visibility and acceptance. * We'd like to enjoy the benefits of utilizing Apache's infrastructure and legal protection. * Most team members have been enthusiastic users of Apache software for many years and would like to be part of the family with it's get togethers etc. * It might open the door for cooperation with other projects, such as Felix or Jetspeed. * Apache seems to attract great communities around its projects, we hope joining Apache will help as make our growing community even bigger. * We hope to contribute to Apache's ongoing success by delivering an innovative, dynamic project with an enthusiastic user base. == Criteria == === Community === Wicket has striven to foster a diverse community that is open to everyone. It is released under a non-reciprocal license (Apache License 2.0) to encourage the maximum possible adoption by all potential users and developers. The Wicket community encourages suggestions and contributions from any potential user, and more developers have joined as contributors since the project's inception in 2004. === Meritocracy === Wicket was originally created by Jonathan Locke in April 2004. Then it was taken over in September 2004 by Eelco Hillenius, Johan Compagner and Martijn Dashorst. Chris Turner and Juergen Donnerstag were invited to join that same week based on their contributions and discussions. The project now has committers and users from around the world, and Jonathan Locke is back with the project again. The newer committers of the project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then having commit privileges for some of the applications (wicket-stuff), and then privileges over a larger range of applications. The project members understand the importance of letting motivated individuals contribute to the project after they have proven themselves. == Scope of Sub projects == Wicket is distributed as one large subversion tree, but contains several distinct parts: the core framework, a couple of extensions project that are endorsed by the core developers, an examples project (which includes a component reference), a quick start project and a developer sandbox. One of the extensions projects, called wicket-extensions, has a dual purpose. The first is to ensure the core project does not get too large, while still having a place to put interesting components and utility classes. The second purpose of that project is to provide a place where components can prove themselves before potentially graduating to the core project. Whilst Wicket has these various subprojects, access to the subversion tree is maintained with a single ACL. Once voted in as a committer, an individual will have access to the entire tree, and trust is used to ensure that they only touch the parts of the tree that they are knowledgeable enough to change. == Features == Wicket is a Java web application framework that takes simplicity, separation of concerns and ease of development to a whole new level. Wicket pages can be mocked up, previewed and later revised using standard WYSIWYG HTML design tools. Dynamic content processing and form handling is all handled in Java code using a first-class component model backed by POJO data beans that can easily be persisted using your favorite technology. == Initial Source == The source for Wicket that is to be imported is currently within the Wicket project at SourceForge, a
