Exactly what I meant with the mail to dev a week ago. So I think it's
all good. And actually could raise the wicketstuff standard.
+1!, I guess binding since im a wicketstuff developer:)
Jonathan Locke wrote:
uh, this library is of course a web site... ;-)
Jonathan Locke wrote:
my RSI is bad so please forgive the terseness. the idea:
- make an automated wicket component library
- define packaging structure for wicket library components
- structure of package would define component metadata like svn, faq,
help, etc (probably in meta.inf created from maven pom info by maven guru)
- (only signed) jars could be automatically picked up by some naming
pattern from maven repos and deployed as live demos
- container would be simple to write (no db hassles... just use maven and
packaging)
- everyone makes their components and demos in a standard way so we can
stop asking around about what functionality exists
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
