Thanks Gwyn
Regards Dipu On 9/20/07, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Probably fairly soon - we've been looking at the changes and > discussing it on the dev list, to try & get an idea if it'll cause a > significant delay with regards to the aim of getting a 1.3 release out > ASAP. Currently, however, I think the view is that it'll be likely to > be in and we'll do a beta4, then see how it looks. > > I think I saw some comment about some rebuilding work of Ate's house - > I don't know any more than that, but if he's quiet for a bit, that > might explain it! > > In the meantime, you could get the baseline code from SVN > (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/tags/wicket-1.3.0-beta3), > apply the patch from the jira issue > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12366048/wicket-1.3.0-beta3-portlet-support.patch > and build your own copy if you want to have a look prior to that. > (Build with tests disabled "mvn -Dmaven.test.skip=true install" as the > patch missed changing a particular test expectation) > > /Gwyn > > On Thursday, September 20, 2007, 10:20:23 AM, Dipu < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Ate, > > > I'm interested in the portlet support which you have implemented in > wicket. > > > Any idea when it might be merged into the trunk? > > > Regards > > Dipu > > > > On 9/17/07, Ate Douma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> I'm really happy to announce that a new and quite feature complete > Wicket > >> Portlets Demo is now available for download at: > >> > >> > >> > http://people.apache.org/~ate/wicket/jetspeed-2.1.3-dev-wicket-demo-installer.jar > >> > >> I've worked hard the last few weeks to improve the Wicket portlet > support > >> branch and it can now run all Wicket Examples natively as portlet! > >> See also IRA issue WICKET-658 at > >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-658#action_12528082 where I > >> have provided more information how to install and use > >> this demo. > >> > >> Although there probably are still some minor issues here and there, the > >> demo will show that portlet development using Wicket is now very much > >> feasible. > >> > >> I'd like to invite anyone interested to try out the demo and see it in > >> action for yourself, and of course please report any encountered > >> issue/problems to the > >> dev list. > >> > >> I've developed the portlet support based on the 1.3.0-beta3 release > (with > >> few minor bugfixes ported back from the trunk), so although the trunk > >> development has > >> progressed at it usual aggressive speed, updating the portlet-support > to > >> the latest Wicket trunk shouldn't be too much work (that is: right > now!). > >> > >> As we would like to start using Wicket for a rewrite of the Jetspeed-2 > >> administration portlets *now*, it would be great if the portlet support > can > >> be > >> incorporated into the trunk as soon as possible. Delaying this until > after > >> the 1.3.0 release would mean being out-of-sync with the main wicket > trunk > >> development > >> all the time and a lot of work each time we want/need to bring it back > in > >> sync. > >> > >> Initially, back in May this year, my idea was waiting with merging the > >> portlet support in the trunk to after the 1.3.0 release. > >> But as 1.3.0 still isn't released yet and still in beta phase, it would > be > >> much better to merge now otherwise the portlet-support will be > constantly > >> out-of-sync > >> with the main wicket trunk development, causing a lot of effort each > time > >> we want (or need) to bring it back in sync. > >> > >> For Jetspeed-2, we would very much like to start using Wicket for a > >> rewrite of the Jetspeed-2 administration portlet *now*. Having towait > until > >> after the 1.3.0 > >> release, or be dependent on unofficial builds from the portlet-support > >> branch would be less ideal to say the least. > >> Other parties, like my own company, already have started using the > Wicket > >> portlet-support branch, so having to delay the merge to trunk really > >> wouldn't be fun. > >> > >> AFAICS though, the impact of merging the portlet-support to trunk won't > be > >> big. > >> I had to make a few (internal) changes in the wicket core, but I don't > >> think those will have functional side-effects. > >> > >> To make it easier for the other committers to decide if we can merge > the > >> portlet-support to trunk now, I will create a new JIRA issue for it. > >> For the changes needed to the current Wicket trunk I'll create separate > >> patches with explanations why and attach those to that issue. > >> (note: most of these changes I already described in detail under > subtasks > >> of the WICKET-647 issue). > >> We can then discuss these changes individually and if need be see if > >> alternative solutions are possible. > >> After those changes are reviewed and accepted, the portlet support then > >> can be merged to the trunk. > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Ate > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > /Gwyn > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
