BookmarkableLink and PageLink are different things. They do generate different urls. (and maybe some security things can be easier applied to a pagelink then on a bookmarkable page which exposes the page class directly)
So i would say just remove the Page constructor. johan On 2/23/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hey, i'm USING this! you will break a ton of my code for no reason. the IPageLink constructor is useful for delayed construction with interesting parameters and also fits neatly in with the way i do navigations (the page identity bit). i'm very -1 for removing this. if you really MUST mess with the api because it doesn't fit your style, can we at least keep for people like me who are using it or like it and rename to DelayedPageLink or something? Matej Knopp wrote: > > Frank Bille wrote: >> On 2/22/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> why dont we just remove PageLink altogether? >>> >> >> +1, remove the bastard :) >> >> Frank >> > a big +1 from me too. > > -Matej > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/VOTE%3A-remove-PageLink%28String%2CPage%29-constructor-tf3274259.html#a9115685 Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
