We should try to save all pages even if 1 fails. So the current code looks fine
On 4/2/08, Timo Rantalaiho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or could list.clear() be done in a finally block? Of a try
> block going over the whole loop.
>
> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Author: knop
I see... Perhaps 1.3.3 is better... should make it a big release note though!
On 4/2/08, Juergen Donnerstag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I is currently working fine if inheritance is just one level deep. But
> if it is 2 or more level deep than each higher level gets inserted
> after the first
I is currently working fine if inheritance is just one level deep. But
if it is 2 or more level deep than each higher level gets inserted
after the first . E.g.
<-- gets inserted here >
should be like
Juergen
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Martijn Dashorst
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I got it:) Although I think I heard a discussion once on the wicket irc
channel about scala..
I admit I can be a little naive sometimes.
regards Nino
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
In case you didn't get it: april fools'! :-)
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Eelco Hillenius
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Hi
As you've probably all seen I am the creator of the blog tutorial. I'd
like to make it completely open source and revamp/create the
documentation. Plus make the labs a little more clear minded, and maybe
have another pair of eyes on it(if anyone cares to). But I think I
should move it from
How can the attributes belong to a non-serializable class that wasn't
referenced in the page?
-Matej
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Antoine Angénieux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's the weird thing : I never encountered any exception during
> serialization (as i tried to debug that very spe
In case you didn't get it: april fools'! :-)
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Eelco Hillenius
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that half of the team is getting ready to work on Wicket 1.4,
> which is all about supporting the Java 5 features, I think it is time
> for the other half of th
Yeah, thanks Nino,
Eelco
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guy's I've taken the liberty to use the wicket logo at the linkedin
> group is it okay?
>
> --
> -Wicket for love
>
> Nino Martinez Wael
> Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
Or could list.clear() be done in a finally block? Of a try
block going over the whole loop.
On Tue, 01 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: knopp
> Date: Tue Apr 1 06:52:21 2008
> New Revision: 643400
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=643400&view=rev
> Log:
> WICKET-1470
>
> M
i dont think i would want to support something that is
markup-placement-specific. we have formcomponentlabel that does this
and it works in all situations. dont know, this is my opinion, others
may have different ones.
-igor
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
yeah, that would take away the convenience it's made for and
would probably result in some more emails on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
if that's a blocker, i'm okay with that.
Gerolf
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> if that is in markup _after_ the component an
That's the weird thing : I never encountered any exception during
serialization (as i tried to debug that very specific wicket task today
;)). That's why i was wondering if it could be the java serialization
mechanism that was buggy... No exception thrown, no log trace !
And the attributes in
I'd err on the side of caution. I'd like it to go into 1.4.
Martijn
On 4/1/08, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> how was it now exactly with css?
> pretty random or mixed? or was it now that derived first (in order) to base
> last? (so is it exactly reversed)
> or is it that it was
I have already ported Wicket to WhiteSpace[0], so I can help you port
it to Brainfuck since I have the experience.
[0] http://compsoc.dur.ac.uk/whitespace/
-igor
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Stefan Lindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:
>
> >Argh!
if that is in markup _after_ the component and component doesnt have
setoutputmarkupid(true) what happens?
-igor
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what do you guys think about this?
> i talked to Jan about this and i think this could really remove
> some
how was it now exactly with css?
pretty random or mixed? or was it now that derived first (in order) to base
last? (so is it exactly reversed)
or is it that it was a bit more random?
If it was pretty random then it can go in 1.3.3, dont know about the exact
reverse then i guess we could wait for 1
doesn't sound to dangerous no.
There isn't a overridable method called (that they could have overridden)
right?
the only thing is that now it tries to render a child component (that isnt
there?)
then it sounds fine with me
johan
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Juergen Donnerstag <
[EMAIL PROTEC
I have a fix for that and our junit tests are still ok with it. But as
always, some existing apps might behave differently because the order
of the css links will change (base first, derived last). Should that
go in before 1.3.3?
Juergen
>
> Begin forwarded message:
> > From: "Matej Knopp" <[
I vote for freemarker as the superior markup language (pure html feels
so 1992)
also the layout managers should be based on layout (using code
generation) to ensure maximum browser performance.
Am 01.04.2008 um 22:21 schrieb Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael:
Ahh, yes an then I'd like
what do you guys think about this?
i talked to Jan about this and i think this could really remove
some boilerplate code.
I have implemented it based on WicketMessageTagHandler.
the wicket:for attribute is only processed on label tags.
"wicket:message" in the example would have to be something dif
Ahh, yes an then I'd like to suggest going for VB6, as I really liked
that. Especially their error handling and nice syntax. and use the
CPIP[1] to ensure more stability!
1=http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/
Maurice Marrink wrote:
Excellent idea, but it might be hard to convince apache to mo
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Maurice Marrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Excellent idea, but it might be hard to convince apache to move to git
> so maybe we should consider leaving apache.
>
Nah, just let everyone have their own repository. Then, right before
release time, everyone emails t
Excellent idea, but it might be hard to convince apache to move to git
so maybe we should consider leaving apache.
Maurice
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By the way,
> before we do all that
> i think we should really first deprecated subversion and
By the way,
before we do all that
i think we should really first deprecated subversion and go straight to GIT.
that will make all this development a lot easier
johan
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that half of the team is getting ready t
Another neat feature would be if we could use MS Visual Studio to
develop Wicket apps. VS ROCKS!
And Drag and Drop!
Maurice
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hmm
>
> we need a compiler that transforms wicket code directly to html and
> javascript so th
GWT!!!
(I hear that the W stands for Wicket... Google's Wicket Translator)
On 4/1/08, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hmm
>
> we need a compiler that transforms wicket code directly to html and
> javascript so that we can run completely in the browser
>
>
> johan
>
>
>
> On Tue,
hmm
we need a compiler that transforms wicket code directly to html and
javascript so that we can run completely in the browser
johan
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that half of the team is getting ready to work on Wicket 1.4,
> which i
Nope. But the exception should be in logs anyway.
-Matej
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:26 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, ok. I thought since it was merely logging the error that it was
> going on in the thread. So, Wicket doesn't stop your request if the
> page's data can't be s
Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:
>Argh! I like java and I like wicket, what boundarys are you guys
reaching that java cant solve? And I then the future in short will be
all about alternative languages in jvm, like jruby scala python etc. Why
not keep it safe a little longer, but I guess
Oh, ok. I thought since it was merely logging the error that it was
going on in the thread. So, Wicket doesn't stop your request if the
page's data can't be serialized?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that's just saving. The serialization itself is do
But that's just saving. The serialization itself is done in the
request thread. Only saving of the bytearray is done in separate
thread.
There's a good reason for serializing the page in the request thread.
We cache the serialized page data so when servlet container replicates
the session we reuse
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 3:13 PM, lars vonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Exception is only logged (as ERROR) if something is not serializable, so
> it will only complain in your logfile. See Objects.objectToByteArray()
> method.
>
> I don't think page serialization is done in a seperate Thread
The Exception is only logged (as ERROR) if something is not serializable, so
it will only complain in your logfile. See Objects.objectToByteArray()
method.
I don't think page serialization is done in a seperate Thread though. I
couldn't find this in the code. But please correct me if I am wrong.
Are you sure your attributes were not transient? There's no way wicket
would skip it without an error. ObjectOutputStream should certainly
complain and we do log the serialization exception.
-Matej
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:31 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Hi,
Now that half of the team is getting ready to work on Wicket 1.4,
which is all about supporting the Java 5 features, I think it is time
for the other half of the team to start talking about Wicket 3.0 (we
skip 2.0 as we've used that for prototyping before), which is
wicket 1458 is about wicket not performing completely well if tags are
changed from open-close to open-body-close, e.g. like this
protected void onComponentTag(ComponentTag tag)
{
if (tag.isOpenClose())
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Antoine Angénieux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just fixed a bug in one of my wicket apps that was linked to page
> versions disk serialization...
>
> I had an object that did not implement Serializable that was deep down
> in the object instances hierarchy (like
Matej Knopp wrote:
Yeah, sorry about that.
Don't, better having a couple bugs easily corrected and have the new
StringResourceModel of 1.3 thant in 1.4 ;)
this certainly isn't the intended behavior.
I've just commited a possible fix, can you please update and try?
Yep, I reverted to my previ
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Swing compatibility. We want our future components to be able to run
> directly in Swing, and Swing components to be run in Wicket apps. Just
> like some of our competitors.
>
We actually talked about this in ##wicket
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that half of the team is getting ready to work on Wicket 1.4,
> which is all about supporting the Java 5 features, I think it is time
> for the other half of the team to start talking about Wicket 3.0 (we
> s
Also, instead of naming things like they are some web concept, we
should name them to what they can do. Link is not a very good concept.
Instead of a Link we would have a Clickable. But that name is lame...
so I suggest prefixing all our interfaces with ImA. this would make a
clickable component i
I just fixed a bug in one of my wicket apps that was linked to page
versions disk serialization...
I had an object that did not implement Serializable that was deep down
in the object instances hierarchy (like page -> some object -> ... -->
non serializable object).
Wicket never complained
Hi,
Now that half of the team is getting ready to work on Wicket 1.4,
which is all about supporting the Java 5 features, I think it is time
for the other half of the team to start talking about Wicket 3.0 (we
skip 2.0 as we've used that for prototyping before), which is
scheduled for 2009.
We've
Yeah, sorry about that. this certainly isn't the intended behavior.
I've just commited a possible fix, can you please update and try?
-Matej
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Antoine Angénieux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Since Matej committed the IComponentAssignedModel implem for
>
In our app that just migrated to wicket 1.3.2 we got a lot of the
following exceptions [0]
and at the same time our app was running low on memory. Now I don't
know which one caused what, but a jmap histogram showed something
rather disturbing:
num #instances#bytes class name
---
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> I guess this should go into Wicket NG (2.0/1.5) as a
> replacement for the current image map. I don't think it is a
> problem that we break backwards compatibility for a couple
> components in the release after the generics release.
...
> I'll add this one to the wish list
Hi Guys,
Since Matej committed the IComponentAssignedModel implem for
StringResourceModel, trying to retreive the model value during page
construction results in a "no resource found".
It appears that during this phase, the component can only access its on
properties file in the new implem.
one more thing:
if I change to it
still fails.
the output is:
also, calling tag.setType(XmlType.OPEN) for test2 results in a
MarkupException:
Unable to find component with id "test3" in [MarkupContainer[Component
id=test2 ...]]
Gerolf
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Juergen Donnerstag <
I've added some more tests to show that it is workong correctly. The
point with is that OpenCloseTagExpander automatically opens
certain tags.
Juergen
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Gerolf Seitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm afraid the fix doesn't really address the reported issue,
> becau
49 matches
Mail list logo
