Re: tomcat 6
If you decide to go for Jetty, you should try the run-jetty-run[1] plugin that Eelco wrote. Basically if your project is set up right, i.e. web.xml in the right place and so on. You can run it like any other Java Application from Eclipse's run configurations. regards, Guðmundur Bjarni [1] http://code.google.com/p/run-jetty-run/ -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/tomcat-6-tp20064539p20086138.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Salve and Guice
I haven't used Salve with Wicket, but I've been using the wicket-guice integration quite extensively. The reason I'm answering this is that I feel that many of the use cases of Salve can be solved with pure vanilla Guice. In cases where you can't control the instantiation of objects, you can use static injection, which is a bit dirty, but IMO cleaner than instrumentation. :) So this post is maybe a tiny bit off topic. :) The way I've been doing it is by using the guice-servlet package which allows you to extend a GuiceServletContextListener to create a Injector. To tell your servlet container about this, put something similar into your web.xml: listener listener-classdk.dtu.kiosk.guice.MyGuiceServletContextListener/listener-class /listener Then I use the wicket-guice integration for hooking the two together. To bootstrap Wicket with Guice you simply use the following in your web.xml filter filter-namemyApplication/filter-name filter-class org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WicketFilter /filter-class init-param param-nameapplicationFactoryClassName/param-name param-value org.apache.wicket.guice.GuiceWebApplicationFactory /param-value /init-param init-param param-nameinjectorContextAttribute/param-name param-valuecom.google.inject.Injector/param-value /init-param /filter Voila! Now you can use the @Inject annotation in any Wicket component. You also have the option of using Providers if you need something dep. injected or in the difficult cases static injection. regards, Guðmundur Bjarni -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Salve-and-Guice-tp20087649p20088079.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Salve and Guice
I agree that static injection is fugly, it makes unit tests very sad and
kills puppies, but in some cases its a necessary evil. Lets say for example
that it is only needed in a very few cases, then IMO pulling in Salve is a
bit of an overkill. I've tried out Salve, liked it but it's a bit of a
commitment to use compile time weaving/instrumentation.
Last I checked, the InjectorHolder only worked with Spring and not with
Guice. I looked into fixing that some time ago but didn't finish that work.
I've got more time now if someone is interested? :)
regards,
Guðmundur Bjarni
igor.vaynberg wrote:
there are cases where this approach plain old sucks.
as you mentioned, if its not a component you have to use static injection
which is fugly
class mydataprovider implements idataprovider {
public mydataprovider() {
InjectorHolder.getInjector().inject(this);
}
}
another problem is that the injector creates a proxy which in certain
situations cant be done. eg your dependency is a class from a 3rd party
library that does not have a default constructor, thus cglib cannot create
a
proxy.
another advantage of salve is that it _removes_ the field from the class.
so
your classes are smaller and there are no serialization problems
whatsoever
as far as dependencies go.
-igor
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Salve-and-Guice-tp20087649p20100143.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket
I agree with Antoine. Guðmundur Bjarni Antoine van Wel wrote: 1) Generifying* Wicket [X] Can best be done like currently in the 1.4 branch, where models and components are both generified. I care most about the improved static type checking generified models and components give Wicket. This is the only solution that makes sense, the other options are either a partial solution (which is a *very, very* bad thing, mixing generic with non-generic code INSIDE a framework!?!?) or no solution at all (which has my preference over a partial solution, since at least it is concise). 2) How strongly do you feel about your choice above? [X] I might rethink upgrading if my choice doesn't win. Seriously, no generics at all is better than a partial solution. Since upgrading involves more issues than generics alone, I may rethink only... If the decision to upgrade boils down to this issue, then I won't. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/users%2C-please-give-us-your-opinion%3A-what-is-your-take-on-generics-with-Wicket-tp17589984p17596960.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to set the path for a uploadfolder?
If memory serves, then you can get access to the servlet request, and pull out the context path from your page via: getWebRequestCycle().getWebRequest().getHttpServletRequest() regards, Guðmundur On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:20 AM, unka_hahrry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I want to save images to a specified uploadfolder, but I don't want to define the Folder object with an absolute path. Is there a possiblity to define a Folder relative to the context root? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-to-set-the-path-for-a-uploadfolder--tp16848200p16848200.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WUG] Copenhagen
Hey Nino, I just saw this message now. I signed up myself and a friend of mine who is quite interested about Wicket. regards, Guðmundur Bjarni Nino.Martinez wrote: Hi This is a reminder, and callout as it would be really nice to be some more people in order to get discussions going. Heres the proposed content: *Wicket-Spring-JPA-Hibernate (Could also be a discussion of the upcomming archetype wicket Iolith) *Wicket Testsing experiences *Creating behaviors *Selling Wicket (to your company, and customers) * Integrating javascript libraries with wicket Please sign up here: 23 april 16 hrs is date and time. http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Community+meetups If you have any suggestions on content, etc please write. This also goes for requests on content. -- -Wicket for love Nino Martinez Wael Java Specialist @ Jayway DK http://www.jayway.dk +45 2936 7684 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-WUG--Copenhagen-tp16449433p1668.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maven multi module app using wicket spring hibernate
Hi, I've been using Spring and Wicket together with no problems. My web.xml part looks something like this: filter filter-namewicketFilter/filter-name filter-class org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WicketFilter /filter-class init-param param-nameapplicationFactoryClassName/param-name param-value org.apache.wicket.spring.SpringWebApplicationFactory /param-value /init-param init-param param-namebeanName/param-name param-valuewicketApplication/param-value /init-param /filter I see that you are using the servlet rather than a filter, but that should not pose any problems, but the filter is the preferred way in Wicket 1.3. regards, Guðmundur Bjarni -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Maven-multi-module-app-using-wicket-spring-hibernate-tp16537252p16537448.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
