Exactly (I wrote something similar, but it apparently was declared spam:(). We could of course improve our structure as always, lifting the level a bit. As I see it wicketstuff are as ops4j, which brings advantages and disadvantages as well.
-regards Nino 2010/3/18 Martin Grigorov <mcgreg...@e-card.bg> > Here is how I understand wicketstuff hosting: > > Someone makes something cool and decides to share it with the community. > Then this person asks in the mailing lists for commit permissions. After > that this person jumps into something else and don't have time to > support the project. Later on I need this cool feature and the first > place to look for it is wicketstuff.org (you know because of the > advertising in the mailing lists). Then I add or improve something to > this project and again share it with the community. After me someone > else does the same and the project lives. Otherwise some volunteer (like > Jeremy) decides that this project is not maintained and moves it to > attic. > > About GoogleCode, github, bitbucket, ... yes, you can put your project > there. But there are two problems: > 1) it is less visible > it is not next to the other wicketstuff projects where everyone checks > first > 2) when you don't have time to support it you need to give commit > permissions to the people who have time or they will start clone it all > over Internet. And this will just confuse further future > users/maintainers > > On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 15:25 -0400, Boris Goldowsky wrote: > > It sounds like whoever is responsible for wicketstuff needs to make a > > clear choice here. > > > > Is Wicketstuff going to be maintained as a place where lots of useful > > add-ons will live? If so, it needs someone to take a slightly more > > active role as curator; make sure the releases are done in parallel with > > wicket releases, make sure modules don't get dumped there without at > > least some documentation; and weed out modules that are abandoned, where > > no one volunteers to take on maintenance, or whose function has been > > absorbed into wicket's core. > > > > Alternatively, make it clear that wicketstuff is NOT going to be > > maintained, and people like me who would like to share modules will > > share them in some other way - on Google code, a personal website, or > > whatever. > > > > Either way is ok I think, it just would be useful for those of us who > > are interested in contributing modules to know. > > > > Thanks > > Bng > > > > > > Jeremy Thomerson wrote: > > > Really, it should match what's at trunk of Wicket, which should be > > > 1.5-SNAPSHOT. There should be a branch for 1.4.x that is 1.4-SNAPSHOT. > > > But, nobody is really maintaining it any more, so it's a free-for-all. > > > That's always been the problem with WicketStuff. > > > > > > -- > > > Jeremy Thomerson > > > http://www.wickettraining.com > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Boris Goldowsky <bgoldow...@cast.org > >wrote: > > > > > > > > >> The wicketstuff-core is calling itself version 1.4.2 in the HEAD of > SVN. > > >> Shouldn't this be updated to 1.4.7 now to keep in sync with Wicket? > > >> > > >> Bng > > >> > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > >
