Re: Could somebody please comment on WICKET-2889?

2010-08-09 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
16:43, Stefan Fussenegger wrote: Hi all, It's been more than 2 month since I've created WICKET-2889 and submitted a patch to fix it. As nobody commented yet, I thought I should mention it here. The attached patch reduced required heap space for stateful pages by 2/3 (depends o

Could somebody please comment on WICKET-2889?

2010-08-09 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Hi all, It's been more than 2 month since I've created WICKET-2889 and submitted a patch to fix it. As nobody commented yet, I thought I should mention it here. The attached patch reduced required heap space for stateful pages by 2/3 (depends on configuration though, >100M for my application

Re: wicketstuff-merged-resources 3.1 parent class scanning?

2010-06-24 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Hi Ryan, I'm the maintainer of wicketstuff-merged-resources. Sorry, I don't watch the mailing list as closely as I probably should. I've just reverted your changes as the project wasn't able to build. The required org.wicketstuff:annotations:1.4.7-SNAPSHOT isn't available from a public repos

Re: Result of tester.assertResultPage(..) depends on JRE?

2010-02-05 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
elieve we fixed this in 1.4.x using a linkedhashmap -igor On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Stefan Fussenegger wrote: I've just found out that the outcome of a JUnit test using WicketTester (v1.3.7) depends on the JVM version. This test public void testRender_deployment() throws Exception

Result of tester.assertResultPage(..) depends on JRE?

2010-02-04 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
I've just found out that the outcome of a JUnit test using WicketTester (v1.3.7) depends on the JVM version. This test public void testRender_deployment() throws Exception { WicketTester tester = doRender(DEPLOYMENT); tester.assertResultPage( Resou

Re: document onkeypress onkeydown

2010-02-04 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Add a WebMarkupContainer to , i.e. ... add(new WebMarkupContainer("body") .add(new AjaxEventBehavior("onkeypress"){ protected void onEvent(final AjaxRequestTarget target) { LOG.debug("keypress"); } })); Gatos wrote: Hel

Wicketstuff Teamcity: Wrong Maven home path configured for Wicketstuff Merge Resources 1.3 branch

2010-02-02 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
"Wicketstuff Merge Resources 1.3 branch" points to non-existing maven directory: [12:36:26]: /home/wicket/apache-maven-2.0.9/bin/mvn: Can't open /home/wicket/apache-maven-2.0.9/bin/mvn: No such file or directory [12:36:26]: Build finished (from http://wicketstuff.org/teamcity/viewLog.html?bui

Announcement: Annotation-based Mounting of Resources

2009-10-14 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Today, I’m happy to announce the availability of annotation-based mounting and merging of resources in wicketstuff-merged-resources (version 3.0-SNAPSHOT for Wicket 1.4, version 2.1-SNAPSHOT for Wicket 1.3). In order to mount resources, all that’s needed is adding annotations to component class

TeamCity configuration for wicketstuff-merged-resources

2009-08-06 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Hi, nor sure who's currently in charge as I haven't been around for a while. So, who do I have to ask for a change in the TeamCity configuration of my wicketstuff-merged-resources project [0]? I just created a branch [1] which I'd like to be added in order to get builds for this branch. Che

Re: Why does Component#renderHead() honor isVisible() but ignores isRenderAllowed() and isVisibilityAllowed()?

2009-07-07 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
ah, seems it has been changed in 1.4 (trunk) - sorry for not checking this before. Is it too late for 1.3 to get the same behavior as in 1.4? trunk: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/trunk/wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/Component.java wicket-1.3.x branch: http://svn.apache.org/repo

Why does Component#renderHead() honor isVisible() but ignores isRenderAllowed() and isVisibilityAllowed()?

2009-07-07 Thread Stefan Fussenegger
Hi all, I was about to file a JIRA issue for this, but I thought I ask on the mailing list first. Is it really possible, that nobody discovered this before? I have this strange feeling that this is as designed. However, I don't think there is any point in adding CSS or JS for components a user