Hi there,
I am trying to push out events that contain the moving locations of a
users buddies, so I can update the GMap on the page using plain JS and
the GMarkerManager.
Right now I am using Pushlet for this, but that has the disadvantage
that it is not integrated into Wicket, and it uses a
On 3/6/07, Peter Neubauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
I am trying to push out events that contain the moving locations of a
users buddies, so I can update the GMap on the page using plain JS and
the GMarkerManager.
Right now I am using Pushlet for this, but that has the disadvantage
Why is there no set methods on the request cycle like there is for
session
and application?
Yes, that is an interesting point. Just grew like that I guess. But
having a set method wouldn't really help your case, right?
It would help, because I have a Request Cycle container that keeps track
I feel Wicket like one thick template engine? such as smarty,velocity with
thick business layer.
the page object is just like something in common template engine..
do you agree with me?..
--
View this message in context:
* John Patterson:
OK, but the phone-book app is still broken in 2.0 due to this
bug in WicketFilter.isWicketRequest () - at least it was a week
ago when I wrote the initial email. Can anyone get the current
phonebook app to work? I think when that bug is fixed my app
would have
They are nothing alike. Wicket parses your HTML template into a Java
object tree, then renders the page by recursively rendering the page
root, calling each object.
Velocity copies the template, then does variable substitution, more
like a mail merge.
Brian
On Mar 6, 2007, at 1:31 AM,
* Xavier Hanin:
As you see I'd like to implement two ways to do that, one
simple purely wicket based, and another more scalable requiring
dojo. In your case I don't know much about your map, but with
the implementation I propose you can send javascript as you
would on an
Hi,
If you are using plain js on client side, I think cometd is perfect to
you. With cometd you can publish in a channel an event on server side
(CometdPublisher - wicket-contrib-Dojo). On your client you subcribe to
a channel(CometdBehavior - wcd too) and when datas are published on
server
On 3/6/07, Vincent Demay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If you are using plain js on client side, I think cometd is perfect to
you. With cometd you can publish in a channel an event on server side
(CometdPublisher - wicket-contrib-Dojo). On your client you subcribe to a
channel(CometdBehavior -
Got the same error
On 3/5/07, Matt Welch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm only just now upgrading to Wicket 1.2.5 and I've run into an issue. I'm
certain this is an problem on my side and not a bug because other people
would have run into this and reported by now and I can't find any reports
Hi,
I'm setting up my environment to start Wicket development. I'm using
Wicket-2.0-Snapshot. I'm getting the error: The type org.slf4j.Logger cannot
be resolved.
Is there any library dependency I'm missing on my classpath? I have
commons-logging and log4j on my path.
--
Wicket is Wicked
Ok, I've found the dependent library and everything is fine now.
On 3/6/07, Udora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm setting up my environment to start Wicket development. I'm using
Wicket-2.0-Snapshot. I'm getting the error: The type org.slf4j.Loggercannot be
resolved.
Is there any library
On 3/6/07, Xavier Hanin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/07, Vincent Demay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If you are using plain js on client side, I think cometd is perfect to
you. With cometd you can publish in a channel an event on server side
(CometdPublisher - wicket-contrib-Dojo). On
I ran into this too a while back, logged under
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-304
The maven wicket-spring-annot build in 1.2.5 is corrupted, either back
to 1.2.4, or build your own 1.2.5 (or like me, move to 1.3 snapshots, if
that is feasible)
Johan
Mats Norén wrote:
Got the
below is a suggestion by me on how to handle repeating components created by
javascript, especially for the case where several fields are involved.
would love to get a comment on it
thanks,
ittay
Ittay Dror wrote:
i think this can be solved inside wicket quite easily:
*
That's about right. But I would say Wicket associates Java objects with
your markup (template is really not a very good word here precisely
because people think of Velocity or Freemarker, but also because there isn't
one markup file... a Wicket page is quite commonly a complex, recursive
merge
i don't really (have the time right now to) fully understand this thread,
but at the risk of saying something obvious, i wanted to point out that
although wicket components in a listview don't have unique names, they do
have unique /paths/ because their parent container is named with the row
Thanks very much. It's working now.
Cheers,
Michael
Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: see ComponentRequestTarget which will
render a markup of a certain component only
and RequestCycle.urlFor(Component,RequestInterface) which will create a url to
any callback method on any component
Hi all,
we received the following exception within a WebPage using an injected
SpringBean - HibernateSessionFactory via sublassed LocalSessionFactoryBean :
ERROR - Objects : Error serializing object class
de.ponton.box.core.ui.detail.Detail [object=[Page class =
i am planning to build an abstraction for cometd support (jetty and tomcat
now)
inside wicket. So that it really works like a ajax behavior that has a
constant open connection
where that you can get and then write the components you need.
I first need to build that we can release and get the page
On 3/6/07, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i am planning to build an abstraction for cometd support (jetty and tomcat
now)
inside wicket. So that it really works like a ajax behavior that has a
constant open connection
where that you can get and then write the components you need.
do like the message says:
You can switch to JDK based serialization by
calling: wicket.util.lang.Objects.setObjectStreamFactory(new
IObjectStreamFactory.DefaultObjectStreamFactory()) e.g. in the init
method of your application
i think there is a bug in our optimized serialization where it
On Monday, 05 March 2007 05:20 pm, Igor Vaynberg escreveu:
well if you want it to be horizontal then you can do something like this:
setprefix(div style=\float:left;\);
setsuffix(/div);
Thanks. I did a setSuffix( ), which seems to work fine.
-igor
On 3/5/07, Thomas R. Corbin
class NewChatMsgEvent implements ComentEvent {
...
}
final WebMarkupContainer chatwindow=new WebMarkupContainer(chatwindow);
chatwindow.add(new CometBehavior(NewChatMsgEvent.class) {
protected void onEvent(CometEvent e, ComentTarget t) {
It seems as though some of the data just doesn't come back until we do a
refresh.
We're using wicket 1.2.5.
We've got a form and then after the form we have a DefaultDataTable with some
rows.
Sometimes it seems like it stops drawing the page after part of the form,
maybe after the second
ive only heard of this happening when wicket pages were rendered inside
sitemesh, is that what you are doing?
-igor
On 3/6/07, Thomas R. Corbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems as though some of the data just doesn't come back until we do a
refresh.
We're using wicket 1.2.5.
We've got a
Hi
I will be away from the 7th March till 14th March, and will be back only on the
15th.
If you have any urgent matters, please contact the following persons
Technical issues: Ciek Yi ([EMAIL PROTECTED] / +60123260583)
Other issues: Edwin Tay ([EMAIL PROTECTED] / +60123165148)
Thank you.
On Tuesday, 06 March 2007 10:57 am, Igor Vaynberg escreveu:
ive only heard of this happening when wicket pages were rendered inside
sitemesh, is that what you are doing?
Jeez. Yes! That's exactly what we're doing.
We have been thinking of getting rid of sitemesh once we're
im not sure if a solution has been found. afaik its some weird bug in
sitemesh. search the mailing list for sitemesh to see other threads
-igor
On 3/6/07, Thomas R. Corbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday, 06 March 2007 10:57 am, Igor Vaynberg escreveu:
ive only heard of this happening
Switch the rendering from RENDER_TO_BUFFER to DIRECT_RENDER (or
something similar)
Martijn
On 3/6/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
im not sure if a solution has been found. afaik its some weird bug in
sitemesh. search the mailing list for sitemesh to see other threads
-igor
On
itself too. Could the Wicket team change RequestCycle so that either:
1) There is a public or protected static set method in RequestCycle
2) Make the ThreadLocal current inside RequestCycle protected
I'm ready to consider 1) if you can open up an issue for it. That way
we can track progress
Would like some clarification on another seemingly confusing part of Wicket:
using the Session.
First, it looks as if I'm supposed to define my own session, which I guess I
can do (wrapper around getAttribute and setAttribute). First, why? What's
wrong with the default set/getAttribute(String,
I'm trying out Wicket Spring Annotation Integration example and I'm getting
this error at server startup
2007-03-06 13:32:29.030::WARN: failed example
java.lang.Error: Unresolved compilation problems:
The import wicket.injection.IFieldValueFactory cannot be resolved
the released wicket-spring-annot jar is bad, rebuild it from source or use
the one from 1.2.4
-igor
On 3/6/07, jklcom99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying out Wicket Spring Annotation Integration example and I'm
getting
this error at server startup
2007-03-06 13:32:29.030::WARN: failed
First, it looks as if I'm supposed to define my own session
You can, you don't have to.
, which I guess I
can do (wrapper around getAttribute and setAttribute). First, why?
Because it is type safe. Instead of User u =
(User)session.get(_theUser); you simply do User u =
session.getUser(). This
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, it looks as if I'm supposed to define my own session
You can, you don't have to.
, which I guess I
can do (wrapper around getAttribute and setAttribute). First, why?
Because it is type safe. Instead of User u =
java 4: MySession mySession = (MySession)Session.get();
java5: MySession mySession = MySession.get();
(add a get() method on your MySession object)
johan
On 3/6/07, Jason Roelofs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, it looks as if I'm
Dear wicket users,
is there anybody out there who uses wicket with Java SE 6 / JEE 5? Any
experiences, warnings, hints?
What is the official status of Wicket 2.0 against Java SE 6?
Stefan Lindner
winmail.dat-
Take
Thanks guys. I'll build it and put it in our company's maven repo or
consider moving to 1.3. Is there a maven repo housing the 1.3 snapshots by
any chance?
Matt
On 3/6/07, Johan Karlberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ran into this too a while back, logged under
On Tuesday, 06 March 2007 11:24 am, Martijn Dashorst escreveu:
Switch the rendering from RENDER_TO_BUFFER to DIRECT_RENDER (or
something similar)
Thanks!
I'll investigate that just until we get rid of it, since I like the way
wicket works better, anyway.
Martijn
On
On 3/6/07, Stefan Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear wicket users,
is there anybody out there who uses wicket with Java SE 6 / JEE 5? Any
experiences, warnings, hints?
What is the official status of Wicket 2.0 against Java SE 6?
Faster with better GC, that's what Java SE is for Wicket.
Sure there is.
repository
idWicket Snapshots/id
urlhttp://wicketstuff.org/maven/repository/url
snapshots
enabledtrue/enabled
/snapshots
releases
enabledfalse/enabled
/releases
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's
wrong with the default set/getAttribute(String, String) being public and
saving to a Hash of some sort?
If you want that, provide your own session and expose those methods
yourself. We don't provide it because we think it is bad
On 3/6/07, Jason Roelofs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would you mine expounding on this a little more? This comes across to me
as it's bad programming practice to follow paradigms set in place for the
past 10+ years (Web session being a hash of strings at it's most basic
implementation).
so why
Hi,
We (Wicket's developers) are having some discussion over 1.3 vs 2.0
and how difficult it is as a nun-funded project to spend so much time
synchronizing the branches.
A major issue in the discussion is that not everyone is convinced
anymore that the constructor change in 2.0 is for the
Would you mine expounding on this a little more? This comes across to me as
it's bad programming practice to follow paradigms set in place for the past
10+ years (Web session being a hash of strings at it's most basic
implementation).
Exactly, that's what I'm saying! :) Much of what is wrong
What's the advantage of the new code (no, I'm not currently using
Wicket 2.0)? Is it processing performance? Memory usage? Is the
framework code a lot less complex? A little less complex?
[]s Gus
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We (Wicket's developers) are
On 3/6/07, Gustavo Hexsel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the advantage of the new code (no, I'm not currently using
Wicket 2.0)? Is it processing performance? Memory usage? Is the
framework code a lot less complex? A little less complex?
Please see:
i would like to see a list of what we'd lose by not supporting the
constructor change. i actually prefer the add() usage and always
have. i just don't want us to forget why we originally wanted to
make the constructor change. the only two things i can recall are:
- better diagnostics, but i
pros:
* free to call any method in the constructor like getpage(), urlfor(), etc.
* access to markup attributes in constructor as opposed to render time
* fail at component instantiation time rather then render time if there is a
hierarchy-java mismatch - so you get a java line-precise error
Why does code explosion happen as a consequence of the constructor
change?
Gili
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
pros:
* free to call any method in the constructor like getpage(), urlfor(), etc.
* access to markup attributes in constructor as opposed to render time
* fail at component
just thinking out loud, there is no workaround for the constructor pros.
are there any important things people really /need/ to get done that we're
making impossible without the constructor change? i don't care to much
about accessing markup attributes in the constructor because i don't care
because the parent must be known at construction time and by YOU since YOU
are the one calling new. so if there is an indirection somewhere like there
is with the toolbars you have to use a factory in order to get the correct
parent passed to you by the component at a later time.
-igor
On
well it is useful when constructing javascript behaviors because they can
create urls to pass to javascript at construction time instead of doing it
at a later point (onattach?). but it is mere convinience.
-igor
On 3/6/07, Jonathan Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
just thinking out loud,
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
the released wicket-spring-annot jar is bad, rebuild it from source or
use the one from 1.2.4
http://bzzt.net/~arnouten/wicket-spring-annot-1.2.5.jar seems to work
fine - I believe I got it from wicketframework.org at some point.
Arnout
i don't care to much
about accessing markup attributes in the constructor because i don't care
much about driving code from markup.
If you create components that are based on or work together with
Javascript components, this is a nice feature to have. Driving code
from markup sounds more
yeah, with our new headercontributor stuff some of these problems no longer
matter
-igor
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i don't care to much
about accessing markup attributes in the constructor because i don't
care
much about driving code from markup.
If you create
The biggest problem I see is a matter of economics. Current
applications can't be upgraded to the constructor change economically.
Too much has to change to move in that direction.
I do like the programming model, although I haven't used it in a
production system (as I am doing with 1.x).
Having
On Mar 6, 2007, at 2:12 PM, Eelco Hillenius wrote:
1) Who uses 2.0 for serious projects?
I'm hoping to roll my project out over the next few weeks, it uses
2.0. I don't have a lot of pages though, so porting wouldn't be a
problem.
2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you
To speak as an end-user:
1) Who uses 2.0 for serious projects?
We use 2.0 in a serious project for mobile patient data acquisition. We plan
the rollout for about next week (despite wicket 2.0 is not even in beta status).
2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you prefer 1.3's
We
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
A major issue in the discussion is that not everyone is convinced
anymore that the constructor change in 2.0 is for the better. There
are pros and cons for sure, but we want to get your opinion on this.
I'm a committer, but I'm also a user, and I feel pretty strongly
On 3/6/07, Stefan Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To speak as an end-user:
2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you prefer 1.3's
We prefer the 2.0 constructor.
what about it do you prefer?
in most cases. But I was convinced of the advantages that the new
constructor has
3) If we would ever backtrack on the constructor change (*if*, don't panic
for now) how much trouble would that give you?
I don't believe that this would be a real problem. The task consists for
changig changing
new Component(this
into
this.add(new Component
in most cases.
going the other way 2.0-1.x should be trivial
This is true. At least it should be a lot easier.
Eelco
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
code explosion?
i count 5 chars less for every component create! ;)
1.3: container.add(new Child(id));
2.0: new Child(container,id);
johan
:)
On 3/6/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
pros:
* free to call any method in the constructor like getpage(), urlfor(),
etc.
* access to
Can anybody make a quick unit test with such a class?
Anybody that encounters a specific class that should work but doesn't please
add a method to WicketOutputStreamTest
johan
On 3/6/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do like the message says:
You can switch to JDK based
yes a submit will always be redirected so what happens if you don't do
setRedirect(true)
are you then not getting that expired page??
does the onSubmit really be called? Or is that already the expired page?
johan
On 3/5/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
dont know if there is a
this is very strange because as far as i know that flag is only set inside
that if:
if (!getFlag(FLAG_NEW_VERSION)) -- this may return false?
{
// if we have no version manager
if (versionManager == null)
{
Michel Wichers wrote:
we received the following exception within a WebPage using an injected
SpringBean - HibernateSessionFactory via sublassed LocalSessionFactoryBean :
...
de.ponton.box.core.ui.detail.Detail-sessionFactory
It looks to me like that class has a reference to sessionFactory.
if its injected through @springbean its ok
-igor
On 3/6/07, Al Maw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michel Wichers wrote:
we received the following exception within a WebPage using an injected
SpringBean - HibernateSessionFactory via sublassed
LocalSessionFactoryBean :
...
when i used a pop window or select open a new window for current link, some
error happens
it' seems I have to serializable PropertyDescProxy ?
ERROR wicket.markup.html.WebPage - Page [Page class = com.toyshop.web.PayPage,
id = 4] couldn't be cloned to move to another pagemap
Line #601 in Page.java is the only place where versionManager gets set
back to null from what I can tell..
// If we went all the way back to the
original page
if (page != null
page.getCurrentVersionNumber() == 0)
When i set the html element to readonly or disabled , the wicket form cannot
get the value of these specficed field. and I have control these fields accord
to the different user.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the
So you should set them only disabled according to specific user
attributes. See wicket.authorization.Action.ENABLE for something that
is useful in this context.
Eelco
On 3/6/07, tooy li(Gmail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When i set the html element to readonly or disabled , the wicket form cannot
Or more quick and dirty, override isEnabled of the components you
target and let it return true or false depending on the current user.
Eelco
On 3/6/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you should set them only disabled according to specific user
attributes. See
well as long as there are workarounds, i'm fine with dropping the
constructor change if everyone else seems to feel this way and there aren't
any better arguments for it.
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
i don't care to much
about accessing markup attributes in the constructor because i don't care
Well, I'm not a core committer , so dont have enough vision to talk about
the internal effects of the change, but as a user from the pre-1 versions
of wicket till now(1.2.5), here are some humble opinions:
pros:
* free to call any method in the constructor like getpage(), urlfor(),
etc.
*
normally ajax shouldn't make a new version but in 1.3 we have also an ajax
version number beside the page version number.
But that the moment page.versionManager is set to null the flag should be
false at that time.
But if you have a quick test that exposes this null pointer please make an
issue
As a user I'm very happy with the current features and possibilities in
wicket, and am only waiting for the changes(stateless forms,
Stateless pages, forms and links are already backported to 1.3!
page cache, ...
The SecondLevelCacheSessionStore? Already in 1.3 :)
) in 1.3. My main
On 3/7/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a user I'm very happy with the current features and possibilities in
wicket, and am only waiting for the changes(stateless forms,
Stateless pages, forms and links are already backported to 1.3!
page cache, ...
The
I've experienced the exact same problem. You'll get this a lot when working
with ajax components. I've also reported this issue to the wicket 2 jira. If
you add if(versionManger != null) prior to the versionManager call you'll be
fine but that's probably an ugly hack. But it seem to work til
Hi Igor,
using the default factory works ... however a fix would be great ;-)
Thanks for your help.
Regards,
Michel
Igor Vaynberg schrieb:
do like the message says:
You can switch to JDK based serialization by
calling: wicket.util.lang.Objects
.setObjectStreamFactory(new
create a jira issue and assign it to johan :)
-igor
On 3/6/07, Michel Wichers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Igor,
using the default factory works ... however a fix would be great ;-)
Thanks for your help.
Regards,
Michel
Igor Vaynberg schrieb:
do like the message says:
You can switch
83 matches
Mail list logo
