OK, I just want to add a thank you towards Vincent and Frédéric for staying with us in this (semi) heated discussion.
Martijn On 3/26/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
agreed next time :) -igor On 3/26/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/26/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > we have reached a consensus in the discussion thread and it went quiet > so i > > assumed no one else had anything to say. > > > > like i said the controversy was over the fact that it would do too much > > magic/be automatic and that is why i closed the original jira issue as > wont > > fix. right now it is completely manual so i committed it because if you > dont > > use it explicitly it doesnt affect you. the basic idea behind it is the > > same, but the way it is implemented is completely different so we > wouldnt > > even be voting on what we have started out discussing. > > > > shall we have a vote still you think? > > It would have suited the discussion to get a summary of the proposal, > and see if no-one objects. Because after 64 messages in a thread, it > gets hard to see what actually has been proposed. > > Though I'm 0 on the subject. > > Martijn > > -- > Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com > Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket > Wicket 1.2.5 will keep your server alive. Download Wicket now! > http://wicketframework.org >
-- Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.5 will keep your server alive. Download Wicket now! http://wicketframework.org
