What does a standard db integration entail?!? What will it provide? Why do
we need to integrate the database layer with the ui layer - arent we
skipping the whole middle layer??

You don't need wicket-contrib-data* packages to write a database driven
wicket app, infact, for me those packages present nothing useful and nothing
that makes it any easier to access the database.

Here is a very simple architecture:

Use spring (or any other container) to create your middle layer and manage
all the database stuff (closing/opening session, etc). Have wicket pull out
services objects out of the spring context and use them to manipulate data
in the database. Done. 

-Igor


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gili
> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 1:55 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Standard for database integration? 
> (Please!)
> 
> 
>       I think the first step towards a standard DB 
> integration is to give more use-cases using something other 
> than Hibernate. To date, I've touched upon Hibernate, Cayenne 
> and now I am looking at db4o. It would be nice to know how 
> far one can go with the wicket-contrib modules if something 
> other than Hibernate is used. I haven't gotten that far yet 
> so I can't tell you at this point...
> 
> Gili
> 
> Gwyn Evans wrote:
> > I tend to agree with Nathan, in that there does seem to be a lot of
> > odd parts dotted around... Maybe they all hook together, 
> but I suspect
> > that only if you know what you need can you pull the right bits
> > together...
> > 
> > Personally, I'm not familiar with Hibernate, so don't 
> really know what
> > I'm looking for, although I was able to pull together a
> > PageableListView app to display a table loaded via Hibernate a while
> > ago.  I'm limited to JDK 1.4, so can't use annotations (and thus the
> > later cd-app as a template).
> > 
> > I'm still not sure if I'm missing something here, as even 
> that simple
> > app required wicket-contrib-data, wicket-contrib-data-hibernate-3.0
> > and wicket-contrib-dataview...
> > 
> > What I'm personally missing is a generic (template) DB web-app, that
> > would run under JDK 1.4, that would provide CRUD functionality and a
> > pageable view...
> > 
> > Any thoughts/comments?
> > 
> > /Gwyn
> > 
> > On 04/10/05, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> >>What kind of integration do you want with the dataview? The 
> dataview is a
> >>generic package and all you need to integrate it is to provide a
> >>dataprovider:
> >>
> >>protected static class UsersDataProvider implements IDataProvider {
> >>                private UserDAO getUserDao() {
> >>                        return 
> MyApplication.getInstance().getUserDao();
> >>                }
> >>
> >>                public Iterator iterator(int first, int count) {
> >>                        return getUserDao().find(first, count);
> >>                }
> >>
> >>                public int size() {
> >>                        return getUserDao().count();
> >>                }
> >>
> >>                public IModel model(Object object) {
> >>                        return new 
> DetachableUserModel((User)object);
> >>                }
> >>        };
> >>
> >>Getting a hold of a sessionfactory is also very easy 
> especially when you are
> >>dealing with spring
> >>// create your application subclass inside spring
> >>Class MyApplication extends WebApplication {
> >>        private SessionFactory sf;
> >>
> >>        public void setSessionFactory(SessionFactory sf) {
> >>                this.sf=sf;
> >>        }
> >>
> >>        public SessionFactory getSessionFactory() {
> >>                return sf;
> >>        }
> >>
> >>        public static MyApplication getInstance() {
> >>                return (MyApplication)Application.get();
> >>        }
> >>}
> >>
> >>Then anywhere in your code:
> >>
> >>MyAPplication.getInstance().getSessionFactory();
> >>
> >>I personally think these things are pretty trivial and I 
> don't see a need
> >>for a stand alone project. Maybe an example is all we need.
> >>
> >>-Igor
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> >>>Nathan Hamblen
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:49 AM
> >>>To: [email protected]
> >>>Subject: [Wicket-user] Standard for database integration? (Please!)
> >>>
> >>>One of this project's strengths is its community of
> >>>contributers. Unlike some other Java web component
> >>>frameworks, Wicket is not controlled by a founder & dictator.
> >>>Hooray for that. But in some areas, disorganization is killing us.
> >>>
> >>>At present, there is no standard way to access a hibernate
> >>>session factory. I understand that the lack of such a
> >>>standard doesn't stop me from accessing one somehow. Wicket's
> >>>domain is the user interface, and I could integrate with a
> >>>database however I like. That's not very helpful though, to
> >>>me and every other web application programmer who absolutely
> >>>have to integrate with a database before we do anything else.
> >>>Most of us are on hibernate, often accessed through Spring.
> >>>We just want one way to hook these things up.
> >>>
> >>>In late August there were two (or more) database packages
> >>>that did things rather differently from each other, then
> >>>Jonathan Locke announced contrib-database. Apparently he
> >>>didn't think the existing efforts were clean enough. That's
> >>>fair, I'll take his word for it. I was ready to switch to
> >>>that package until I saw that it didn't go beyond loading
> >>>individual hibernate objects. Loading one object is the easy
> >>>part. The interesting part, the part that could be done a
> >>>hundred different ways, is how to load and display many
> >>>objects using a query. That's handled by the apparently
> >>>unclean contrib data and dataview packages. Great.
> >>>
> >>>I wonder if this is just a problem of communication. Surely
> >>>dataview, for example, could be adapted to contrib.database's
> >>>foundation. If those two could be merged, we'd have something
> >>>deprecation-proof to use right now. The code doesn't have to
> >>>be perfect, it just needs to give us an overall structure to
> >>>program around.
> >>>
> >>>Are people talking to each other? I'm just asking because,
> >>>from my perspective, there's a bizarre silence on the
> >>>subject. An argument would be better than nothing. We NEED
> >>>database integration. Not just for the "enterprise,"  but for
> >>>any web application worth using. Let's get it together.
> >>>
> >>>Nathan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> > Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, 
> downloads, discussions,
> > and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wicket-user mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
> > 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.desktopbeautifier.com/
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, 
> discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
> 
> 
> 




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

Reply via email to