On 6/10/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a) remove the old (kinda unsupported) tree from extensions (is
> anyone even use it?)
+1
Cool.
> b) move the current Tree and TreeTable* from core to extensions
> (sight, i know we moved it into core just recently)
Don't know yet.
I'm pretty positive this would be a good move. Porting from 1.2 would
be non-issue, and if someone uses the trunk, you'll just have to
change the imports.
> c) move the new Tree into core.
So the 'new new' tree is incompatible with the 'new' tree? Why can't
you just give them different names and let them live together in a
package? One of the anoying things currently is that you have to ask
people whether they are working with the core or extensions tree; I
bet that's as confusing for users as it is for us. Imho, it would be
better to just delete the old one and keep all the trees we're gonna
support in core projects together in one package so that users can
find them more easily and compare their features.
The new tree could be a drop-in replacement for the old one, as long
as you don't extend the old one's functionality. So rather then try to
be backwards compatible, which wouldn't work well anyway, i prefer
having the old one in extensions and new one in core.
As for the names, the new one probably won't be called a Tree. There
will be a LabelTree and a LinkTree, as well as BaseTree on which you
can override a method to provide node panel (which is much easier
customizable than what we current have - people have demanded this a
lot).
I don't want two different trees in core, that would just confuse
users. Having one (recommended) tree in core, and the old one in
extensions (so that we don't break people's code) is what I'd prefer.
> * I don't think it's a good idea to have a TreeTable in core anyway.
> We don't have DataTable in core and I'm pretty sure much more people
> are using DataTable then TreeTable.
If I remember correctly I argued for moving everything related to
repeaters to core a while ago. The initial idea was always that
extensions was either for components that you rarely use in a project,
or for components that need to 'mature' a bit. I don't think the
latter is a very good idea anymore (we could have wicket-stuff
projects instead) and imho, any component that you'd almost always use
in any project could go to the core project. Datatables definitively
fall into that category. And trees... well it is still my opinion that
they have a place in lots of projects. Core is fine with me.
Eelco
Well, if I remember correctly the outcome of the discussion was
DataView into core, DataTable stays in extensions. Although I wouldn't
mind DataTable in core.
I think a Tree (the new one :) ) belongs to the core. But the
TreeTable really can live in extensions. At least the one we now have
(with layout problems).
-Matej
