Hello,
After the upgrade to 6.x I found that the order of the headers were reverse compared to 1.5. This caused the com.googlecode.wicket.jquery.ui.form.datepicker.DatePicker to fail as it did not wanted to display the popup to pick the date in a panel. The problem was that it depended on common jquery that was added in a parent page. Then by using the ParentFirstHeaderRenderStrategy this worked again and NO other code changes were needed. But speaking of a general usecase, I see that you can then simply follow the page structure and panel structure as how also the page inheritance goes and the panel inheritance as well. Common things go in the parent page or panel and only specifics go into the page or panel itself. Also what I found was that html header elements like 'title' were not place in the beginning of the header anymore (which I believe is nicer to have it before javascript includes). A title element I mostly added in the base page of my application of which all other pages inherited from. Although, I do not understand why wicket developers (and I assume you mean the core developers and not those developers using the framework) do not like a parent first strategy, I simply would say…. Wicket is modular and pluggable in many ways. Why would wicket developers force this to there users by not allowing it? Given the framework supports this almost already, leave this as a choice to the users to select it as what would be the best for them. Of course, a default implementation can be the preferred way of the wicket developers, but allowing users there own choice. Harrie On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > The change to use ChildFirstHeaderRenderStrategy by default was introduced > in 1.5.0. The usage of a system property to switch the strategy was > intentional - to make it harder. Wicket developers believe that > ParentFirstHeaderRenderStrategy should not be used. > But there was a bug that <wicket:head> didn't followed the rules. In 6.0 > both Java and HTML contributions became more consistent. > Additionally now the application developer can promote the HeaderItems by > wrapping them in PriorityHeaderItem. Yet another way is to use > custom org.apache.wicket.settings.IResourceSettings#setHeaderItemComparator. > > What is your usecase to prefer ParentFirstHeaderRenderStrategy ? > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Harrie Hazewinkel > <hhazewin...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> >> I recently upgraded from wicket 1.5 to 6. This is mostly not a real >> problem. However, >> I believe that the complete change of the header render strategy is not >> compatible. >> This is also mentioned in various places. Wicket 1.5 may not have been >> consistent >> in for the header rendering, but why not trying to maintain some easy >> compatibility? >> >> >> As Wicket 1.5 used a parent first render strategy, I can find still ways >> that Wicket 6 >> can support this. Why not supporting this in the applications settings >> either? >> >> It eases upgrades of big projects and overcomes a way that there is a lot >> of code >> to be added in Java. Wondering if more people believe a better support for >> the >> ParentFirstHeaderRenderStrategy is wished for instaed of adding renderHead >> code all over. >> >> >> Or do I miss something? >> >> >> Harrie >> hhazewin...@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > > > -- > Martin Grigorov > jWeekend > Training, Consulting, Development > http://jWeekend.com <http://jweekend.com/> Harrie hhazewin...@gmail.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
