Re: MarkupParserFactory

I don't think you are right. A new markup parser is create for each markup file and each markup parser gets a new instance of PrependContextPathHandler. Looks fine to me. Juergen On 4/25/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think I undestand the issue... Eelco On 4/25/07, Ig

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

If you are really, really sure overriding getModel is the only reasonable way to go, we can consider not having it final and put a big warning in the docs instead. However, this is such a core feature that we really wouldn't want people to get the wrong idea. Are you sure there is no acceptable al

AW: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

We also have components with our own getModel implementation because of special Models that extend Imodel and it would be very hard for us to go around this if getModel is final. Stefan Lindner -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jan Vermeulen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch,

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

+1... lol :D -- Bruno Borges Summa Technologies Inc. www.summa-tech.com (48) 8404-1300 (11) 3055-2060 On 4/25/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/25/07, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -... the NOTIC

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/25/07, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -... the NOTICE file is in my opinion overzealous This is also our administration for external libs :), and prevents recurring questions when someone new looks at the files..

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Martijn Dashorst wrote: > Thanks for your vote! > > On 4/25/07, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> - it would be nice to have NOTICE, README, etc have a ".txt" extension >> for those people that use a graphical file browser. > > The reason they are without .txt is because otherwise we wou

Re: Speaking of [EMAIL PROTECTED]@(U(IUFDS-4J and Wicket

I also prefer slf4j (non-binding, of course). slf4j does not suffer from the classloading issues and, in my experience, is a quick and easy replacement for commons-logging. On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 21:42 +0200, Xavier Hanin wrote: > Personnaly I prefer slf4j, especially because it doesn't suffer fro

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Thanks for your vote! On 4/25/07, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - it would be nice to have NOTICE, README, etc have a ".txt" extension for those people that use a graphical file browser. The reason they are without .txt is because otherwise we would get 2: one without .txt and one

Re: Speaking of [EMAIL PROTECTED]@(U(IUFDS-4J and Wicket

Personnaly I prefer slf4j, especially because it doesn't suffer from classloading issues. My 2c. Xavier On 4/25/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Don't care personally. Eelco On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did this change fall of the charts from the ba

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Hi Martijn, Wednesday, April 25, 2007, 5:25:26 PM, you wrote: > We have 12 PPMC members and 4 mentors. Until now we have had 1 vote > from a PPMC member and one from a mentor. Can we get some weight > behind this release please? +1 to release here. Did a quick scan over & all seemed well - was

Re: Speaking of [EMAIL PROTECTED]@(U(IUFDS-4J and Wicket

Don't care personally. Eelco On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Did this change fall of the charts from the backport lists? Must we change the logging to SF$#L@@#4j or can we live with commons-logging? Martijn (who hasn't been bitten with clogging, yet) -- Learn Wicket at

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Martijn Dashorst wrote: > The vote: > [+] Yes, ask the IPMC to ratify the 1.3.0-incubating-beta1 release > [ ] No, don't ask the IPMC I skimmed through libs, copyrights, etc and have minor remarks. These don't prevent the release to happen, but are merely for info and future action if you consider

Re: Wicket BoF expectations

Martijn Dashorst wrote: What are the expectations for the Wicket BoF at ApacheCon? Are we deciding on site what to do? Or is some preparation involved, i.e. introducing Wicket, etc? Well, from the few BOFs that I've attended, it really is just about coming together. That's it. Whatever comes

Wicket BoF expectations

What are the expectations for the Wicket BoF at ApacheCon? Are we deciding on site what to do? Or is some preparation involved, i.e. introducing Wicket, etc? Martijn -- Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.6 con

Speaking of [EMAIL PROTECTED]@(U(IUFDS-4J and Wicket

Did this change fall of the charts from the backport lists? Must we change the logging to SF$#L@@#4j or can we live with commons-logging? Martijn (who hasn't been bitten with clogging, yet) -- Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: #

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Given the importance of this release to the Wicket project and our goal of graduation I expected more enthousiasm/commitment from both the PPMC *and* the mentors Yes! Mentors, let's graduate this baby so tha

Re: MarkupParserFactory

I don't think I undestand the issue... Eelco On 4/25/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Apr 25, 2007 5:37 AM Subject: MarkupParserFactory To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello! I think you have a little

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Given the importance of this release to the Wicket project and our goal of graduation I expected more enthousiasm/commitment from both the PPMC *and* the mentors Yes! Mentors, let's graduate this baby so that we can be out of here! (j

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

On 4/25/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: naah, we share this list with wicket-stuff. makes it easier. Ok, sorry, next time I'll just put a +1 to give my opinion, it will save a couple of emails :-) Xavier -igor On 4/25/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/25/07,

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

+1 -igor On 4/23/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is a vote to release our first official incubator release into the wild. The intent is to release Apache Wicket 1.3.0 beta1 to the general Wicket community. Most API breaks are in, and we expect no major changes in the fina

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can we get some weight behind this release please?... I second this request - a larger number of positive binding votes (and non-binding votes from community members are also ok) is certainly a good sign for Incubator PMC members who a

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

Given the importance of this release to the Wicket project and our goal of graduation I expected more enthousiasm/commitment from both the PPMC *and* the mentors. Martijn -- Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

i thought we have the three required votes for it to pass yours, bertrand's, and frank's so as long as no one votes -1 we are set no? On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We have 12 PPMC members and 4 mentors. Until now we have had 1 vote from a PPMC member and one from a m

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

I didn't run rat, but a manual check looked good to me. +1 Eelco On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We have 12 PPMC members and 4 mentors. Until now we have had 1 vote from a PPMC member and one from a mentor. Can we get some weight behind this release please? Martijn --

Re: [vote] Release Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-beta1

We have 12 PPMC members and 4 mentors. Until now we have had 1 vote from a PPMC member and one from a mentor. Can we get some weight behind this release please? Martijn -- Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.6

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

naah, we share this list with wicket-stuff. makes it easier. -igor On 4/25/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/25/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > why would our opinion matter? you are free to start a wicket-stuff project > to integrate whatever you want :) Agreed,

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

On 4/25/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: why would our opinion matter? you are free to start a wicket-stuff project to integrate whatever you want :) Agreed, but since Bruno posted on the dev mailing list, I thought he was more specifically asking opinion from the wicket team. Xavie

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

+1 for just "getting something working". use wicket-stuff for now and worry about licensing *if* it works well enough to try and push into the core. On 4/25/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: why would our opinion matter? you are free to start a wicket-stuff project to integrate whate

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

jdk1.4 doesnt have covariant return types anyways. when we move to jdk 1.5you can bring this up again :) -igor On 4/25/07, Jan Vermeulen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Johan Compagner wrote: > > typecast? in 2.0 you didn't have to cast when using the model or > getModelObject() > where did you n

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

Johan Compagner wrote: > > typecast? in 2.0 you didn't have to cast when using the model or > getModelObject() > where did you need to cast? > I'm not referring to the object of the model, but to the model itself: we have extended models that implement specific interfaces that allow other opera

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

As I see it, it could be implemented MarkupContainer, looking for an interface IAlternateParentProvider when add() is called, and add it to the parent returned by getAlternateParent(). I don't know if the alternateParent logic should also apply for replace & remove. Jan. igor.vaynberg wrote: >

Re: [wicketstuff scriptaculous] error in examples pom.xml

so its foo, bar, kazam. interesting. -igor On 4/25/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think that blatant errors can be fixed by anyone with write access. In this particular case it should not lead to discussion :) Complete rewrites of functionalities is something that should be

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

i am planning on backporting ialternateparentprovider still. of course if you want to beat me to it with a patch you are most welcome. -igor On 4/25/07, Jan Vermeulen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am now porting our code, and already came across a number of issues: * no longer support for alt

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

why would our opinion matter? you are free to start a wicket-stuff project to integrate whatever you want :) -igor On 4/25/07, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/25/07, Bruno Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry.. worst than Draft Review: JSR 303 is in Draft Ballot yet!! So it'

Fwd: MarkupParserFactory

-- Forwarded message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Apr 25, 2007 5:37 AM Subject: MarkupParserFactory To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello! I think you have a little bug in the class MarkupParserFactory. There is only one instance of PrependContextPathHandler and it

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

We overwrite getModel() to allow components to return their own implementation of IModel (JDK5 feature): quite handy, no ugly typecasts. typecast? in 2.0 you didn't have to cast when using the model or getModelObject() where did you need to cast? The initModel() is another story: I posted p

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

Johan Compagner wrote: > > getModel() needs to be final > there are to many internal methods of Component and MarkupContainer > that are directly accessing the model field. Because getModel() does an > initModel() > and sometimes you don't want that.. > We overwrite getModel() to allow compone

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

getModel() needs to be final there are to many internal methods of Component and MarkupContainer that are directly accessing the model field. Because getModel() does an initModel() and sometimes you don't want that.. i think add() was always final in 1.x.x that was completely rewritten in 2.0 I

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

I am now porting our code, and already came across a number of issues: * no longer support for alternate parents * MarkupContainer.add() (where we could implement our own alternate parent logic) is final * Component.getModel() is now final When I get all code ported & debugged, I will point out

Re: [wicketstuff scriptaculous] error in examples pom.xml

I think that blatant errors can be fixed by anyone with write access. In this particular case it should not lead to discussion :) Complete rewrites of functionalities is something that should be discussed before undertaken, even by 'project owners'. This is because we're trying to build a communi

[wicketstuff scriptaculous] error in examples pom.xml

Hi, I found an error in wicket-contrib-scriptaculous-examples/pom.xml. It has a dependency to wicket-contrib-scriptaculous (of course), but the group ID should be 'org.wicketstuff', not 'wicket-stuff'. I guess the group ID renamed, and you all have a version for the old group id in your loca

Re: Timeframe to move wicket & wicket-ext projects to JDK1.5

and if you do your port now from 2.0 to 1.3 then you could maybe point us to a feature that was in 2.0 but is overlooked by use to backport johan On 4/24/07, Jan Vermeulen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, thanks a lot. Martijn Dashorst wrote: > > You can track the backports on the wiki: > >

Fwd: [Wicket-user] Proxy Error: Wicket Library Examples

- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/_

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

On 4/25/07, Bruno Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sorry.. worst than Draft Review: JSR 303 is in Draft Ballot yet!! So it'll take some time until a final specification for this under JPA. :( Let's continue with HV ? :D It seems reasonable to me, but the opinion from Wicket team would be much

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

Sorry.. worst than Draft Review: JSR 303 is in Draft Ballot yet!! So it'll take some time until a final specification for this under JPA. :( Let's continue with HV ? :D []'s -- Bruno Borges Summa Technologies Inc. www.summa-tech.com (48) 8404-1300 (11) 3055-2060 On 4/25/07, Bruno Borges <[EMAIL

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

Hibernate Validation is related to JSR 303, which is in draft review yet... :( And most probably HV will be used as RI with changes to JPA for sure. But maybe it can start as a contrib project, what'd you think? []'s -- Bruno Borges Summa Technologies Inc. www

Re: Hibernate Validator integration?

I haven't had time to check HV in depth for the moment but I've heard good things about it, and was about to ask the same question as Bruno, because I would be interested too in such a validator. Martijn, doesn't your proposition to rely on JPA spec instead of HV imply to rewrite sg similar to wh