I don't think I've removed it, I just didn't carry it through :)
There are probably more bells and whistles missing.
-Matej
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to reenable
-igor
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Martin Grigorov
It might be called multiple times, it's still better than not calling
it at all. Alternatively we could perhaps add a flag on page to
prevent forwarding detach to components more then once per requests.
-Matej
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Michal Kurtak michal.kur...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I really don't think our core should depend on 1.6. Those few methods
can easyly be put to util classes. Typesafe models can be moved to
separate sub project. I know it makes the build more complicated
again, but 1.6 isn't that common, especially not in production.
-Matej
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at
know... since I'm on a (32bit) Mac and all my co-workers were able to
compile against 1.6 leaving me behind... Now that even developers on
Macs have Java 6, I seriously think that 1.5 is a dead platform.
Martijn
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
I really
We have already a setting that will append last modified time to resource URL.
-Matej
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be possible to generate resource paths with a version string
in them so that browsers will cache resources, but
Don't know anything about it.
Anyone else?
-Matej
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Martin Funk mafulaf...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://twitter.com/mraible/status/4860957884
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:16 PM, dtoffe dto...@yahoo.com.ar wrote:
Perhaps this is the original report of performance problems:
http://techblog.molindo.at/2008/08/wicket-interface-speed-up.html
That's hardly a scalability issue.
-Matej
in for renaming
model, etc. Anyway, here's what we came up with:
FOR (2 binding / approximately 9 non-binding):
Matej Knopp
Igor Vaynberg
AGAINST (3 binding / approximately 9 non-binding):
Martijn Dashorst
Jeremy Thomerson
Eelco Hillenius
NO VOTE:
Johan Compagner
Well, I wouldn't mind changing the name to getPrecedenceScore(), but
that's just naming issue.
Two request mappers can handle same URL, i.e. one is for /mount/point
and one is for /mount/point/more/specific. How would you decide which
one gets to handle the request?
-Matej
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Erik van Oosten e.vanoos...@grons.nl wrote:
Hi,
* I am delighted that the root request mapper is also pluggable and that
request mappers can easily decorate other request mappers.
* In the new setup, am I correct in assuming that you can override the root
Should we rename IModel to Model we would also have to rename Model to
something. ObjectModel sounds like a really good name to me because it
says what it does. Holds single object.
Locator sounds really weird. I think renaming Model to Locator would
be hell lot more confusing than renaming
.
Why not drop the Model class altogether?
Its static helper methods could be located in a new non-instantiable class
Models (note the trailing 's') because there's nothing more exciting the
Model class currently provides.
My 2 cents
Sven
Matej Knopp wrote:
Should we rename IModel
If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it.
The thing here is that not all of us agree that it ain't broken.
-Matej
Oh come one. There are like 5 interfaces in Wicket prefixed with I
that projects normally use. Couple of search and replace will
certainly not bankrupt anyone.
-Matej
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
I am also curious how much more
ipageversionmanager in 1.4 is fundamentally broken because it can only
do undo and has no redo. Plus it's pain to implement for all possible
changes so noone is really bothered to do it. the concept never worked
that's why we have snapshots in diskpagestore.
for 1.5 we should have two page
Main problem with Change is that it only can do undo. It can not do
redo which is what we need when user clicks the Forward browser
button. Plus wicket pages can change significantly between versions.
Representing these differences as chain of Changes is extremely
challenging if not impossible.
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Carl-Eric Menzel
cm.wic...@users.bitforce.com wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 23:15:56 +0200
Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Main problem with Change is that it only can do undo. It can not do
redo which is what we need when user clicks the Forward browser
+1 for the I to go away.
Feels too foreign. And against conventions.
-Matej
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket
has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this
1.5 is going to be neither source nor binary compatible. And I
wouldn't say that consistency and conventions is not a reason.
-Matej
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:14 AM, tetsuo ronald.tet...@gmail.com wrote:
-1
It breaks compatibility for absolutely no reason.
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:45 PM,
/no_word_docs
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Altuğ B. Altıntaş alt...@gmail.com wrote:
what about upgrading projects from 1.4 to 1.5 ?
It breaks compatibility
There will be other breaks. This is not a minor update. Breaks
, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Ryan Gravener r...@ryangravener.com wrote:
It's just my preference. IModel / Model vs. Model / ObjectModel or
Model / ModelImpl
Ryan Gravener
http://bit.ly/no_word_docs
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Easier? How's that? I find
I think that IFoo and Foo is every bit as bad as Foo and FooImpl. Both
show rather poor choice of naming. Same goes for IModel and Model.
-Matej
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Eelco Hillenius
eelco.hillen...@gmail.com wrote:
-1
Breaks compatibility for nothing other than a superficial
the entire state change thing is bit out dated.
Why do you need to change visibility during render? I think the
problem here is possible inconsistency. If you hide component before
it has been rendered it will not render. But if you hide it after
nothing will change.
-Matej
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009
Hi,
actually the changes in 1.5 might be quite drastic as far as wicket
internals are concerned. I've already rewritten the request cycle, url
processing and page management. I'm not sure how much of it will
actually get to trunk though. You can take a look at the code here if
you are interested:
I'll try to find some time to write an overview of the experimental
branch. But the code is an order of magnitude simpler than current
Wicket codes and about the same amount less tangled. It also does lot
less though :) (some of that is intentional).
I have basically rewritten the most messy
what's the point of wasCreatedBookmarkable on resources? On page it
determines whether after redirect the URL will be hybrid even if page
is not mounted. What would it do for resource?
-Matej
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Martijn
Dashorstmartijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to create
If your component does not use model you can use Void.
-Matej
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Douglas
Fergusondoug...@douglasferguson.us wrote:
No.. I just finally set our pom to 1.4 and dealing with the 4,000 warnings!
I'm wondering what other folks are doing for thinks like Link(s) or
5:57 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
If your component does not use model you can use Void.
-Matej
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Douglas
Fergusondoug...@douglasferguson.us wrote:
No.. I just finally set our pom to 1.4 and dealing with the 4,000 warnings!
I'm wondering what
Problem is setDefaultModelObject().
If you have setModelObject(Object o) you can not override it in
subclass and restrict the parameter.
-Matej
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 8:58 PM, tetsuoronald.tet...@gmail.com wrote:
'IModel? getModel()' instead of 'Object getModel()', and 'IModelT
getModel()'
I just committed fix to trunk (1.4). Can you give it a try?
-Matej
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Stefan Simik stefan.si...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to ask, why this bug cannot be simple repaired ?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1912
Its a very serious problems and many
What problem exactly would this solve? Detaching logic is not exactly
trivial and I fail to see any benefit in complicating it with
Component itself being detachable.
-Matej
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
It is also trivial to implement a stop
result in stack overflow.
-Matej
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see how it would make detach logic complicated by marking
Component properly as IDetachable. Care to elaborate?
Martijn
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Matej Knopp
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Paolo Di Tommaso
paolo.ditomm...@gmail.com wrote:
[X] No, don't release it.
Please include WICKET-2207https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2207
2207 should be fixed in it.
-Matej
before
release it.
Thanks, Paolo
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:59 AM,
Just committed fix for WICKET-2207 to 1.3
-Matej
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Juergen Donnerstag
juergen.donners...@gmail.com wrote:
In Maven you define the java compatibility rules for the source and
target only, but not the java version. Using JAVA_HOME is correct.
Please try maven
Indeed, I can reproduce that. It doesn't even work in compatibility
mode. Awesome.
-Matej
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Chipan
daniel.chi...@interview-efm.com wrote:
When the content of a modal window is set using a page creator as shown
below, the modal window is not displayed and
IE
version in both http and https) I'm all ears. Seriously!
-Matej
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, I can reproduce that. It doesn't even work in compatibility
mode. Awesome.
-Matej
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Chipan
daniel.chi
Hi,
it is actually based on YUI, but there is a chance that the javascript
will be rewritten using either jquery or ext core. Also chances are
that it will be part of 1.5 Ajax. However, current trunk is still 1.4,
there is no official 1.5 development yet.
-Matej
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 12:23 AM,
it and dont log big warnings/errors this could result
in way more strange results...
On 03/03/2009, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem of course are explicit page references. Actually, it is
the code in wicket that makes it possible to use page references. It's
*huge* pain
Hi,
more perceptive people have probably noticed that there is some really
obscure page serialization related code in Wicket. What it is supposed
to do is to make sure that when PageA holds reference to pageB, pageA
and pageB get serialized separately and when pageA is deserialized,
pageB is
, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
more perceptive people have probably noticed that there is some really
obscure page serialization related code in Wicket. What it is supposed
to do is to make sure that when PageA holds reference to pageB, pageA
and pageB get serialized separately
, but
it is definitely causing as headaches. i would remove the specialized
serialization code, and if we can detect a page reference from one
page to another during serialization i would log a warning.
-igor
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
more
, it will use the page id to lookup the actual page reference.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
By bad practice I meant unnecessary or accidental page references.
They don't bring you much apart from performance degradation and if
you are lucky nice fat
will fix the bug soon. but, please do try to keep the
voting threads about the votes and spin off a separate thread about
any other related issues.
-igor
2009/2/6 Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com:
Not really sure about it. Doctype is part of the markup stream.
Easiest solution would
+1
-Matej
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
-igor
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
in trunk of course..
Hi,
the reason why there are no grid related issues in jira is that I
can't connect to WicketStuff reason for some weird ISP/firewall
reason. You can send the patch to me directly, I'll take a look.
Thanks.
-Matej
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Ryan McKinley ryan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi-
I
I have never seen any problems with the check.
The reason is that some browsers fire the ajax request even after user has
already clicked another link on page (normal page request). That can have
negative impact on the server side state. e.g.
user is on page 1 version 1
clicks an ajax link and
Hi,
that's probably bug in wicket - depending on Wicket javascript variable when
the wicket-ajax.js is not loaded. Autocomplete value should probably be
changed. Please create a jira issue for it.
-Matej
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Zane Staggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems as though
Yeah, it's sourceforge blocking teamcity again. They probably think we
are trying to DOS them.
-Matej
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And heres the failure message, im not sure why it complains over the
accordion contrib it does
-
Von: Matej Knopp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Samstag, 30. August 2008 01:49
An: dev@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Re: PDF's filename for dynamically generated PDFs
Perhaps Content-Disposition: Inline; filename=yourfile.pdf header
could do the trick?
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2183
Without back button support or a way to manage history, implementing a
single page type of application becomes a bit difficult to do in wicket.
Refreshing the page via F5 should also obviously show the current state of
the page and not re-instantiate it from scratch.
But this is easy to solve
times
for me (for example onClick of AjaxLinks).
I can then using a number of ways intercept back button, get the page from
the store and redirect to it.
Wouldn't something like this work? Am I missing some big picture item here.
-hc
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
Without back button support
Perhaps Content-Disposition: Inline; filename=yourfile.pdf header
could do the trick?
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2183.txt
-Matej
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps this is a general HTML/servlet question but I run into this
prblem under wicket. I
I'm sorry, I don't quite get the idea. Why do you need a separate
component? And why does it need a separate session unique id?
You can take AjaxBehavior subclass (in the experimental branch) and
add it to any component. I'm afraid I don't really see the difference
between special kind of
(tested with trunk)
Shouldn't the method be called *before* the model is updated? At least
that's what the javascript implies. Does anyone know why current
behavior is different?
-Matej
That article is ridiculous. I really want to see what kind of hidden
field vulnerability wicket has. We don't put anything to hidden field
we wouldn't put in the URL.
-Matej
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How is HiddenField insecure in your opinion?
Why can't you just render the javascript in renderHead?
-Matej
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the usecase: in onbeforerender we want to add some prepended
javascript to the ajaxrequesttarget, sort of like:
public class HomePage extends WebPage {
E.g. if you call IHeaderResponse#renderJavascript during ajax request
it should be evaluated before component is rendered.
-Matej
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't you just render the javascript in renderHead?
-Matej
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:28
of terracotta distributed map in
memory work? Although would that still leave the last accessed page as a
page object in memory?
Cheers,
Richard
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
Hi,
the thing is a bit more complicated than just that :) I'm not sure how
Wicket terractotta integration works currently
I think we should wait couple of days for the dust to settle after
igor's commit.
-Matej
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any things we want to fix before we release 1.4M3?
Did we include all bug fixes already performed on trunk?
And could
guess is with
TC because you can then share more than just Wicket state. You can do
Hibernate 2nd level cache, EHCache, and your own POJOs, all in the same
impl.
So TC seems worth finishing up, no?
--Ari
On Jun 30, 2008, at 11:48 AM, Matej Knopp wrote:
Forgive me my ignorance :)
I'm
We are using Wicket 1.3.0 beta 2.
Are you serious?
-Matej
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Wicket stuff server is fairly limited in available memory. We have
a lot of web apps installed in the folder, and I was wondering which
apps do we (still) use?
bamboo
grid-examples
jira
probe
teatime
Yeah, it probably should be.
Could anyone bother to commit it? :)
-Matej
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
shouldn't this also be done on wicket-1.3.x?
Martijn
On 4/27/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: knopp
Date: Sun
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Miguel Munoz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
Also your approach wouldn't work for things like property1.property2
where property 2 container type depends on result of property 1
evaluation.
I can see how it's easy to assume
a lot, so I'm not surprised by this at all.
Well, 875ms really is a lot. But i still have no idea what exactly you
are doing.
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
Also your approach wouldn't work for things like property1.property2
where property 2 container type depends on result of property 1
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:01 PM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
first of all, are you sure property resolver is your bottleneck? I
really have hard time believing that.
PropertyResolver already caches the method instances based on target
object class
class, all my
troubles were gone...
Cheers,
Antoine.
Matej Knopp-2 wrote:
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
A joke?! I already made Component extends JComponent! Does it mean I
won't get to commit that?
-Matej
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Peter Ertl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What? This was a joke?! And I was so excited about Swing -- Wicket
interoperability *lol*
Am 02.04.2008 um 18:07
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 2:17
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
committed.
-Matej
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i might
-Matej
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you think you'll be able to make it for tonight?
Frank
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11
-0
-Matej
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Martijn Dashorst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This thread is for voting only. Use the [discuss] thread for voicing
your opinion or asking questions. This makes counting the votes much
easier.
The discussion on our development list makes it clear
Welcome!
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
welcome maurice, try not to break anything right away :P
Yeah, that's my job!
-Matej
-igor
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maurice Marrink has been active in
Even though this is another class and api bloat and everything I don't
object actually. I had some hard time explaining people why should
they call setDefaultFormProcessing(false) and what does it do so I
think cancelbutton would be convenient to have.
However, maybe others object more against
There have been fixes to the serialization mechanism, so you might
want to check the latest trunk.
-Matej
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Juha Alatalo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Main idea was to ask, if Luke Ma already has? Problem occurs in one very
massive page of ours and creating
Our rendering is little more complicated than that. Also the markup
id assignment is not really part of rendering process, it takes place
sooner. There are technical reasons why it is not possible to preserve
markup id for components with setOutputMarkupId(true). It's been
discussed before.
Yeah, for setMetaData. But will that work for getMetaData as well?
-Matej
On Feb 18, 2008 11:11 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The adapters you have provided should maintain binary compatibility, don't
they?
Martijn
On 2/18/08, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
Hi,
I've changed the RequestCycle.set/getMetadata as well as
Application.set/getMetadata methods to take Object instead of
serializable. It doesn't make sense to require serializable arguments
for this data, that's the purpose of storing things in request cycle.
Unfortunately this breaks the
PROTECTED]
wrote:
Easy to test...
Generate a quickstart on wicket 1.3.0, use the metadata, replace
wicket dep with 1.3-snapshot.
Martijn
On 2/18/08, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, i think the getMetaData method should be resolved correctly.
But I might be wrong
and why on earth would you want to do that? :)
user can still call setMarkupId on component. And there are no
restrictions on the ID except that it can't be empty. So if I call
mycomponent.setMarkupId(1234) should that break the javascript?
-Matej
On Feb 12, 2008 8:13 PM, Gerolf Seitz [EMAIL
Maybe we could have header contribution as we have now, but without
writing the script / link tags immediately. We would just remember
url, and then assign a unique id to each package reference (stored in
application);
Thank we could generate resources like
kind of grouping,
so that it would be more granular. Anyway, I don't see this as a
feature for 1.4. Doesn't seem to urgent to me.
-Matej
-igor
On Feb 5, 2008 4:21 AM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we could have header contribution as we have now, but without
writing the script
Please do. I've tested it with prototype (and scriptaculous), but probably
with different version than yo have. The entire quickstart is not needed,
just attach the files that break it.
-Matej
On Jan 26, 2008 10:07 PM, Ryan Sonnek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this is the second time i've heard of
On Jan 7, 2008 12:04 AM, C. Bergström [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 22:30 +0100, Johan Compagner wrote:
You could make such a thing as an extentions project as a special
session store or ipagestore. But i dont see the big gain because its
not the reading (that doesnt
might. I think the marketing
aspect should not be ignored. Having alternatives for when the default
implementation is not sufficient, or has a bug, or whatever is a huge
benefit, if only to be able to say there's an alternative implementation.
Martijn
On 1/7/08, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED
Can you please create a jira issue with this? I have to test first if
the fix doesn't break other things.
-Matej
On Jan 3, 2008 3:48 PM, Tom Desmet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have a page that has an iframe and an ajax button.
When the ajax button is clicked, the iframe is replaced by a new
Al Maw, are you around? :)
-Matej
On Dec 30, 2007 3:57 PM, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 30, 2007 3:55 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I do think we need to create a solid good release notes to go with
1.3final. Who wants to do that?
I would prefer that
+1
-Matej
On Dec 31, 2007 12:40 AM, Gerolf Seitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
almost all links on the wicket-examples start page are not clickable
in IE6. i just committed the fix, which only involves changes to the files
index.html and ie.css
Frank suggested in ##wicket to rebuild the release,
On Dec 28, 2007 2:29 AM, Juergen Donnerstag
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 28, 2007 2:15 AM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But how can we know that for some pages users don't want to force the
quirks mode?
I'm big -1 on stripping the xml declaration for all pages by default
able to build and ship
wicket applications for over 3 years without the declaration, so I don't see
why we can't do so another 4 months.
+1
-Matej
Martijn
On Dec 28, 2007 11:02 AM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 28, 2007 2:29 AM, Juergen Donnerstag
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Do the error pages work already in IE, because that's quite a blocker
I think :) Is there a jira entry for it?
-Matej
On Dec 27, 2007 8:05 PM, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 27, 2007 7:26 PM, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO this is required to be fixed before 1.3
Hi,
that's quite a change so It's likely that i might have missed
something, but seems good to me.
-Matej
On Dec 22, 2007 2:02 AM, Gerolf Seitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi all,
i spent the last couple of days modifying the form handling process to
better support nested forms (especially
You shouldn't be including non ascii literals in your java code. While
it is possible it can cause problems in various environment. You
should put all your chinese texts in property files (using the proper
escaping).
-Matej
On Dec 14, 2007 5:57 PM, JohnSmith333 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My
Err, I haven't went through the whole thread, but I don't think the
wicket-jetty-cluster is a right thing to put in core.
The pagestore can/will be clustered without any dependencies on
servlet container. And the wicket-jetty-cluster is mostly a session
replication for jetty, there is minimal
fixed in rc2?
Frank
On Dec 7, 2007 1:40 AM, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-1 from me too.
I just commited the fix though. Here's a jira issue for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1209
-Matej
On Dec 7, 2007 1:34 AM, Matt Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Having facebook support in extensions? Well, this is definitely
something we should agree on first i think.
-Matej
On Nov 23, 2007 12:11 AM, Jonathan Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
great. at least eelco and i think it should be wicket-extensions (for 1.4)
because of the importance of it.
I wouldn't mind, as long as we check whether the script doesn't
already include [CDATA[ section.
-Matej
On 11/7/07, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
When i do this in a panels html:
html
wicket:head
script
function test()
{
var x = 10;
if (x 10 x 10) {}
On 11/3/07, Erik van Oosten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matej Knopp wrote:
I haven't heard a single argument against replacing div/ with
div/div except people being anxious of wicket touching the markup.
The best real argument I know is that I want the HLTM to be viewable
without Wicket.
I
Done.
-Matej
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/3/07, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Though I'm not pro on this change, I suggest putting it in before rc1.
Why aren't you pro? Because you don't
Okay. Again. This is not about developer making error!
Code like this:
div/
Something
Is perfectly legal. However, firefox interprets it as
div
Something
...
Which is completely wrong. This is not correcting developer error!
This is correcting browser error. And such thing is very
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
