I'm completely in favor of jumping to Wicket 2.0 and implementing both
of these changes with it. Java 5 support would be a really big plus
(esp. with tools like Retrotranslator and Retroweaver) for me as well.
I'm sure that won't be perfect for some people, but I think it is
reasonable to cut over now and keep a 1.2 version as a maintenance
branch.
--
Jess
On 2/13/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> We are of course very busy finalizing Wicket 1.2, and we /really/ hope
> to get it done soon. This will benefit everyone. So I want to take a
> look beyond 1.2 and try to get some opinions on our roadmap, and
> adjust where appropiate.
>
> There are two very big things ahead of us:
> - constructor refactor
> we have reached a limit to the support we want to provide
> for Ajax and javascript. In order to provide the best support
> we need to know the markup id before it is available. Many
> have been bitten by trying to retrieve an attribute from a
> component tag in the page constructor.
> We want to remedie this by removing the add() method,
> and replacing it with an extra parameter in the component
> constructor, which sets the parent of the component.
>
> public MyPage() {
> WebMarkupContainer c = new WebMarkupContainer("foo");
> c.add(new TextField("bar1"));
> c.add(new Label("bar2"));
> c.add(new Label("bar3"));
> add(c);
> }
>
> will become:
>
> public MyPage() {
> WebMarkupContainer c = new WebMarkupContainer(this, "foo");
> new TextField(c, "bar1");
> new Label(c, "bar2");
> new Label(c, "bar3");
> }
>
> This opens up a lot of better markup parsing strategies for the
> core. We know this is a major API break, but we feel it is necessary
> to implement it in order to move Wicket forward.
>
> - java 5 support
> This is something a lot of people are waiting for. I understand that
> many people want, Igor states /need/, Java 5 support in Wicket.
>
> There is also a negative side to this. Some, or even many of you,
> can't move to java 1.5 as a server platform. We don't know how
> many users this affects. Please give a response when you can't
> move to 1.5. As Wicket is a volunteer effort, we can only support
> so many projects. Supporting both a 1.4 and 1.5 project will
> drain our resources too far, and won't be possible. So we have to
> make a choice.
>
> The questions I'm seeking answers to are the following:
>
> - should the post 1.2 version of Wicket involve both changes?
> - should we make different releases for either change, and thus
> postponing 1.5 to
> Wicket 3?
> - how many of you still require for current or future projects to run
> on JDK 1.4?
> - how many would object to having a retroweaver build of a JDK 5 Wicket,
> which
> enables you to run 1.5 code on a 1.4 JRE?
>
> Thanks for your answers,
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Living a wicket life...
>
> Martijn Dashorst - http://www.jroller.com/page/dashorst
>
> Wicket 1.1.1 is out: http://wicket.sourceforge.net/wicket-1.1
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
> for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
