Martijn - Thanks for your helpful email. The links to the issues list did the trick regarding issues tracking.
First of all, I want to stress how much we appreciate what everyone involved has achieved with contributing to Wicket. You talk about it being a volunteer project with limited time and resources. Speaking for everyone here, we definitely appreciate this. Just to backtrack and give you some context to our situation. The project I am involved with has over 20 developers projected to take over (minimum of) 2 years code cutting time. It is a large IBM Wepsphere Integration Developer (WID) dev. project located in the UK. >JDK 1.5 is already 2 years available. We have held off developing 1.5 >features for long enough IMO. We are using Websphere Process Server version 6.0.2.1 and this currently necessitates adoption of Websphere application server version 6.0.2.17. Websphere do not support Java SE 1.5 until version 6.1 of the application server. As far as I know, they have not released a version of their Process Server that would permit usage of Java 1.5. Depending upon IBM and its plans for future releases, and buy in from our Company to adopt the future releases and undertake such a migration - we must accept that we are working with Java version 1.4. Personally, i wish we were in a position to use 1.5 :( >What is preventing you to upgrade to 1.2.6? Our medium term strategy is to adopt 1.2.6 (and even 1.3). However, in short term we need to address this issue without the overheads of a full regression test. Expect we'll only get sign off for a patch to this issue short-term. A couple clarifications if possible from your email: >Not knowing the details of your concurrency problem, I would urge >anyone to upgrade to 1.2.6, because of the security implications of >said bug. Would the patch ( revision 529917 that specifically addresses the critical bug in 1.2.4) suffice? Or are there other fixes included with 1.2.6 that relate to a "security implication" fix? As above, a change of Wicket release to our code base this close to go-live would rather be avoided if possible. >That said, we will support Wicket 1.3 for bug fixes, and possibly some >features will be backported (portlet support may be one such feature), >but that is based on available interest, and the impact of said >feature on 1.3. Usually we shy away from API breaks, providing a >binary compatible release on maintenance branches. And yes >*eventually* we will stop support for 1.2 and 1.3 as technology >progresses: this is a volunteer project and we only have limited time >and resources. Are you saying that 1.3 supports Java 1.4 for all dot releases therein. As of Wicket 1.4 there will be a dependency upon 1.5. Again, just looking for explicit response on this. Commercially, we are an example where usage of 1.5 just is not viable. I believe the decision to go with 1.5 will currently preclude a significant proportion of third party service vendors. Specifically, for stake holders currently investing in Wicket as a viable web framework on large scale development projects where Java 1.4 is the officially supported version what is the position? You imply that such stake holders can be assured that defects raised in 1.3 will be addressed in 1.3. Does Apache provide such assurance? We understand that this assurance would not necessarily include enhancements but only bug fixes. Finally, thank you once again. We would like to contribute to the Wicket community. For instance, we've already developed a significant jar project of UI Common components based / built upon Wicket API. Where feasible, we'll be looking for candidates to contribute. Rich. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Martijn Dashorst Sent: 25 June 2007 14:17 To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Wicket 1.2.4 - Cross session concurrency issues On 6/25/07, Seldon, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really keen to know best place to get a list of outstanding defects between > releases wicket 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 is located? Are there release notes / URL > links etc with this info easily available? Apache issues list starts with > version 1.2.7 but this is no good in our case. Click on the 'Releases' tab and you can see *all* releases. Then you have release notes for 1.2.5 and 1.2.6: * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&sty leName=Html&version=12312236 * http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310561&sty leName=Html&version=12312305 > Our concurrency problem can be reproduced without load testing s/w and > (after exhaustively going through all our "static" code usages and other > possible areas of contention) likely explanation now sits with the version > of Wicket we're using. The Wicket website does include a section about a > critical bug in 1.2.4. In our case, if this is the problem, then it has > proven to be a show-stopper. Not knowing the details of your concurrency problem, I would urge anyone to upgrade to 1.2.6, because of the security implications of said bug. Now that you have it reproducable, could you provide a quickstart/other test so we can fix it? And before that, use 1.2.6 to see if that fixes your problem? > We are hoping to go live with our production release of SOA app in next few > days.... and have concluded we may need to either go with 1.2.6 (if the > migration is proven to fix our defects in test environments) or apply a > patch to 1.2.4 that covers just whats needed from 1.2.6 to fix the > cross-session issues. What is preventing you to upgrade to 1.2.6? > One other point I'd really like to hear discussion about:- we're using > WID version 2.0.1.2 which provides support for Java 1.4. At present, this > limits us up to Wicket 1.3 - will there be ongoing maintenance support for > users unable to migrate further due to limitations in the current app server > versions of Java support available? JDK 1.5 is already 2 years available. We have held off developing 1.5 features for long enough IMO. That said, we will support Wicket 1.3 for bug fixes, and possibly some features will be backported (portlet support may be one such feature), but that is based on available interest, and the impact of said feature on 1.3. Usually we shy away from API breaks, providing a binary compatible release on maintenance branches. And yes *eventually* we will stop support for 1.2 and 1.3 as technology progresses: this is a volunteer project and we only have limited time and resources. If you are anxious with respect to support for older versions, you might want to consider paid support. Wicket Support (http://wicket-support.com) will be happy to give you options. > As developers, we're definitely pro-Wicket but getting nervous regarding > this project's usage of Wicket and outstanding defects. Especially with > migration route options outlined above. I really don't understand what you are saying here. Martijn -- Wicket joins the Apache Software Foundation as Apache Wicket Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now! http://wicketframework.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user This e-mail (and any attachments) may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please do not disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please reply and tell us and then delete it. Should you wish to communicate with us by e-mail we cannot guarantee the security of any data outside our own computer systems. For the protection of Legal & General's systems and staff, incoming emails will be automatically scanned. Any information contained in this message may be subject to applicable terms and conditions and must not be construed as giving investment advice within or outside the United Kingdom. The following companies are subsidiary companies of the Legal & General Group Plc which are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority for advising and arranging the products shown: Legal & General Partnership Services Limited (insurance and mortgages), Legal & General Insurance Limited (insurance), Legal & General Assurance Society Limited (life assurance, pensions and investments), Legal & General Unit Trust Managers Limited and Legal & General Portfolio Management Services Limited (investments). They are registered in England under numbers shown. The registered office is Temple Court, 11 Queen Victoria Street, London EC4N 4TP. Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 5045000 Legal & General Assurance Society Limited: 166055 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) Limited: 1009418 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: 2457525 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 423930 They are registered with the Financial Services Authority under numbers shown. You can check this at www.fsa.gov.uk/register Legal & General Partnership Services Limited: 300792 Legal & General Assurance Society Limited: 117659 Legal & General (Unit Trust Managers) Limited: 119273 Legal & General (Portfolio Management Services) Limited: 146786 Legal & General Insurance Limited: 202050 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
