+1
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a vote to release Apache Wicket 6.10.0, take 3
Please download the source distributions found in our staging area
linked below.
I have included the signatures for both the source archives.
-1 to release, the wicket-experimental modules use already released
version numbers. For example, wicket-atmosphere has 0.12, which was
released in july. This probably went wrong with the 6.9.1 build.
Best regards,
Emond
On Monday 12 August 2013 00:40:40 Sebastien wrote:
[x] Yes, release
This same piece of code also causes problems with wicket-atmosphere:
WICKET-5084
On Monday 12 August 2013 18:44:52 Bernard wrote:
Hi,
We are in the lucky situation to fix a PageExpiredException bug and
improve performance at the same.
WICKET-4997 can be resolved with 2 lines of source
On Friday 26 July 2013 15:02:08 Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Hendy Irawan he...@soluvas.com
wrote:
Thanks Martin.
In short, Jean-Francois Arcand delayed Atmosphere 1.1 into 2.0 and
it's
probably breaking compatibility with 1.0.
+1 to release
One minor issue: we should upgrade the versions of the experimental modules
because the versions got upgraded in 6.9.1. For example, wicket-6.x has
wicket-atmosphere-0.12-SNAPSHOT and wicket-6.9.1 contains 0.12.
Btw, can you add 6.9.1 to jira, so I can close the ticket as fixed in
Hi all,
The changes made for WICKET-5226 (no longer injecting anonymous inner
classes) breaks our applications badly, and I suspect we are not the only
one. The following pattern is quite common:
add(new LinkVoid(rest) {
@Inject
private AccountRestResourceClient accountClient;
Here's my vote:
[X] Yes, revert 5226 and release 6.9.1
Emond
On Wednesday 03 July 2013 10:09:33 Emond Papegaaij wrote:
Hi all,
The changes made for WICKET-5226 (no longer injecting anonymous
inner
classes) breaks our applications badly, and I suspect we are not the
only
one
devs, get a new target over and over again for the same class is a bad
idea. But that's something that can go into 6.10
Emond
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl
wrote:
Here's my vote:
[X] Yes, revert 5226 and release 6.9.1
Emond
[X] Release 6.9.1 with downgrade to jquery 1.8.3, 6.10.0 with jquery
1.10.1 and migration plugin
IMHO fixes in patch releases should be as small as possible and as clean
as possible. Reverting a change that broke things should fix those things
again. Using a different strategy (the
(both use weld).
regz,
/dd
2013/5/6 Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
Hi all,
I noticed the TODO for Wicket 7 to upgrade the CDI dependency
to 1.1. I think it's better to pospone this upgrade to Wicket 8.
CDI 1.1 is part of JEE 7, for which the spec only has been
approved
Hi all,
I noticed the TODO for Wicket 7 to upgrade the CDI dependency
to 1.1. I think it's better to pospone this upgrade to Wicket 8.
CDI 1.1 is part of JEE 7, for which the spec only has been
approved last week. Containers will need some time to
implement the spec, for example wildFly
I've added some text to the page, describing the UI elements. However, it
seems something on that server is blocking WS. The HTTP connection is not
upgraded to WS and does not receive any data. Is Tomcat configured correctly
for WS, or perhaps a proxy is blocking WS?
Best regards,
Emond
On
I think they use the file creation date. If you look at
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/wicket/wicket-core/6.5.0/ you see
that all files are created at the 18th of jan, but the directory itself was
created at the 22th of jan.
Emond
On Wednesday 23 January 2013 09:02:44 Korbinian
to get a consistent formatting behavior
across all developers.
I would say just commit those files. Thats the whole point of the .settings
dir in eclipse.. (else don't specify anything at the project level)
On 14 January 2013 13:27, Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
wrote:
I just
tell me and I'll update my config.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@gmail.com
wrote:
The new files seem to be about wst and require a multi-faceted project,
which is what m2e creates. I don't think they will cause problems if you
do
not have a multi
On Tuesday 15 January 2013 13:55:53 Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@gmail.comwrote:
I've synced all settings with core and added the new files (which probably
only contain some defaults). I agree with Martin that settings file
+1
One note below:
On Tuesday 15 January 2013 14:02:42 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
I.e. the resource jar (a binary) will be committed somewhere, and uploaded
to Maven repo and finally exploded again ?
I don't know
Hi all,
The Eclipse settings files keep causing trouble for me. I've recently switched
from the maven-eclipse-plugin to M2e. The first is deprecated and the latter
has become much more stable lately and provides a much better integration of
Maven in Eclipse. However, M2e changes the
I just accidently pushed the changes to these files, so I hope noone objects
:) If it's not ok, I've no problem with reverting these 2 commits.
Emond
On Monday 14 January 2013 09:02:47 Emond Papegaaij wrote:
Hi all,
The Eclipse settings files keep causing trouble for me. I've recently
Hi all,
I've hit this problem quite a few times now, so I decided to fix it. I
changed this constructor:
public Label(final String id, String label)
to:
public Label(final String id, Serializable label)
AFAIK, this should not introduce any compatibility issues, however I'm
getting this error
the new
jar with Serializable then the linker wont be able to find the method,
because the signature in the app bytecode uses String.
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
Hi all,
I've hit this problem quite a few times now, so I decided to fix
Hi,
private final sounds strange to me. In older versions of Java, you could use
final as an indication to the hotspot for better performance (inlining for
example), but this is no longer the case with recent vms. For example, I've
seen the jvm inline method calls through instance methods of
I did not yet replace our checker with the new one. One of the changes we made
to the checker was that we removed a few lines to improve performance. The old
SerializableChecker uses string concatenation all over the place, and a few of
those places introduce a serious performance overhead (I'm
On Wednesday 10 October 2012 13:40:36 mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
Minor performance improvements.
- String arrayPos = [ + i + ];
+ CharSequence arrayPos = new
StringBuilder(4).append('[').append(i).append(']');
+1
I did find an inconsistency in the pom for wicket-example, it still depends on
wicket-atmosphere 0.4, not 0.4.1. But as these are identical and it's only
wicket-example, I'm ok with that.
Emond
On Friday 05 October 2012 13:36:26 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
This is the second attempt to
On Tuesday 02 October 2012 10:36:07 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
0 vote doesn't stop the release, right ? I don't want to veto the
release because I wont be able to fix this soon.
It doesn't hold the vote, but I do
+1 to release
I've ran our selenium tests against 6.2.0-SNAPSHOT, which contains the same
code as 6.1.0 and all tests pass. I've checked the release, and the files look
ok and it builds fine.
About WICKET-4789, it's a regression against 6.1.0, so I guess it should be
fixed, but I see no reason
+1
On Tuesday 25 September 2012 15:37:27 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
I'm not sure who is using eclipse or some other IDE, but currently I
don't have the proper formatting settings in my local checkout of
Wicket. AFAIR we used to have the formatting rules specified.
I don't know whether
You seem to have added some unresolved tickets as well, such as 4776 and
4777. These have fix in version set to 6.1, but are not resolved yet.
Emond
Op 25 sep. 2012 18:13 schreef dasho...@apache.org het volgende:
Added 6.1 changelog to file
Project:
on
its distribution.
*Bruno Borges*
(11) 99564-9058
*www.brunoborges.com*
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
wrote:
Hi all, especially Martijn,
Martijn, you proposed to build 6.1.0 today. I know you probably won't
get to it today and I also
+1
On Thursday 13 September 2012 16:40:19 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
As for performing the releases, I propose we maintain a ~4 week
schedule for x.y.0 releases, and reserve x.y.z (z 0) for botched
releases.
So our release calendar would become something like:
6.1.0 - build on fri
I opt for the strategy B. Semver dictates that bugfixes should not contain new
features. If we stay on 6.0, we cannot add any new features. If I look at
JIRA, I already see 6 fixed tickets marked as 'improvement': 4730, 4731, 4736,
4745, 4746 and 4748. If we really want to follow semver, these
/repos/asf/wicket/commit/659ee9b3
Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/tree/659ee9b3
Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/diff/659ee9b3
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit: 659ee9b337944a461bef400aedbe5f71a5abccf2
Parents: c0c9635
Author: Emond Papegaaij papega
Components: wicket-atmosphere
Affects Versions: 6.0.0-beta3
Reporter: Sean Lin
Assignee: Emond Papegaaij
Fix For: 6.0.1
If the url of a running atmosphere example is copied and then opened in a
different tab while the old one left open in the same
I've started a vote some time ago about this (somewhere in april), and it was
decided not to move to servlet 3 for wicket 6. Wicket itself does not (yet)
require it, and users are free to use a servlet 3 container. Even if some part
of wicket requires servlet 3, you can have that part depend on
+1 to release.
We've been running our selenium tests against 1.5-SNAPSHOT for weeks now
without any problems.
Emond
On Tuesday 21 August 2012 11:14:18 Martin Grigorov wrote:
This vote is to release Apache Wicket 1.5.8
Git repo
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
Branch
I agree.
Has anyone heard from Martijn Dashorst yet? We could really use a 6.0 final
release. As I've said before, I'm willing to do the release, but I don't know
how. The release documentation seems very outdated.
On Monday 20 August 2012 17:18:48 Andrea Del Bene wrote:
Hi think it is a
On Friday 27 July 2012 13:00:33 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
I've made some bigger changes in wicket-ajax.js lately. Mostly because
of requests/tickets by Christian Oldiges. He is not subscribed to the
mailing lists
The main problem I'm having with this regular expression, is that it
is impossible to understand what exactly it matches and how. I
wouldn't be surprised if the performance varies greatly depending on
the input you are giving it, for example invalid addresses or very
long (too long) addresses.
[x] Keep it as currently implemented
EmailAddressValidator is too strict, but at least you can see what it does.
The regexp in RfcCompliantEmailAddressValidator is crazy, outdated and
probably very inefficient. IMHO, we should mark it as deprecated. The best
solution would be to use a parser
+1
I've clicked through our application, and didn't see any problems.
It would be nice if a known issue could be added to the release notes for
wicket-atmosphere-0.2, refering to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4656 . A simple work around is
available, that should suffice for
at 6:04 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
I cannot log to Jira for some reason so I'll comment here ...
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Emond Papegaaij (JIRA) j...@apache.org
wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4656?page
+1
On Wednesday 30 May 2012 17:05:22 Martin Grigorov wrote:
This vote is to release Apache Wicket 1.5.7
Git repo
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
Branch name
build/wicket-1.5.7
Archived and signed Git repo
http://people.apache.org/~mgrigorov/wicket-1.5.7/
-1 due to the incorrect versioning of wicket-atmosphere. For wicket-atmosphere
to get some public attention (the author of Atmosphere wants to announce it),
it needs a real version.
Emond
On Sunday 13 May 2012 18:51:11 Martin Grigorov wrote:
This vote is to release Apache Wicket 6.0.0-beta2
/contribute/write.html
If it's not up-to-date, maybe it should get attention once your question is
answered. :)
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
wrote:
Hi all,
I just noticed several links on
http://wicket.apache.org/learn/projects
Hi Peter,
You can avoid these merge commits by rebasing on a pull: git pull --rebase. It
is generaly a good idea to keep the history lineair, because that's easier to
read. It's a small thing, but the 'diamonds' can really clutter the history of
a project, especially when multiple committers
custom Options class, which manually serialize
to json, that's perfect for me !...
Thanks again best regards,
Sebastien.
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Sebastien,
Thanks for the feedback. I've changed the 2 methods
On Tuesday 08 May 2012 13:23:16 Peter Ertl wrote:
small typo:
$ git config --global --add branch.autosetuprebase remote
Am 08.05.2012 um 13:19 schrieb Peter Ertl:
$ git config --config --add branch.autosetuprebase remote
We use that option here at Topicus. The problem with that option
Hi all,
I just noticed several links on
http://wicket.apache.org/learn/projects/authroles.html are broken.
Both wicket-security and wicket-shiro point to jdk-1.5-parent on
master. That parent no longer exist. Also, the examples are no longer
available. Where can I change the website?
Best
The ticket you mentioned is already fixed in 6.0. I fixed it right after
filing it.
Best regards
Emond
Op 5 mei 2012 14:16 schreef Peter Ertl pe...@gmx.org het volgende:
Hi wicket team,
I would like to fix WICKET-4533 but 6.0.0 is darn close. So could you
possibly take a look at
I agree, it should be RC1, but first I want to merge my
sandbox/atmosphere branch back in master and I think we should add
wicket-cdi as experimental module as well, just as it is now.
Best regards,
Emond
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
I think
Congratulations and welcome to the team!
Emond
On Thursday 26 April 2012 13:56:31 Martin Grigorov wrote:
Welcome Carl-Eric!
With you in the team I think we can unfreeze 1.4.x branch ;-)
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
Carl-Eric
Thanks for the feedback! It's good that other people take a look at this code
before we put it in Wicket.
I don't understand the problem with @ConversationScoped. What do you mean with
non-portable? Portable to what? AFAIK the conversation scope is part of the
CDI spec and the current
of the n CDI containers:
Weld.
It will NOT work on Apache OpenWebBeans, Geronimo, WAS, TomEE, etc
It will not even run on a few versions of GlassFish because they use a
different Weld version.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Emond Papegaaij emond.papega
Hi all,
It was already mentioned by Martijn some time ago as a suggestion for the
roadmap for Wicket 6, but it was never decided. The question is: should we
move to servlet-api 3.0 or stay at 2.5. Servlet 3.0 has been around for over 2
years now and is supported by most (all?) servlet
Emond Papegaaij:
Hi all,
It was already mentioned by Martijn some time ago as a suggestion for the
roadmap for Wicket 6, but it was never decided. The question is: should
we
move to servlet-api 3.0 or stay at 2.5. Servlet 3.0 has been around for
over 2 years now and is supported by most
2012 21:37:22 Johan Compagner wrote:
Explain to me then what Wicket it self really needs from the new API?
So what are we going to change?
On Apr 13, 2012 2:32 PM, Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
wrote:
Hi all,
It was already mentioned by Martijn some time ago
A bit late, but I didn't have time to reply this weekend. I think a feature
like this is realy nice, but only if it works in all cases, all the time. You
must be able to rely on Wicket to detach your IDetachable no mather where it
is in your component hierarchy, also when it's not directly
Hi all,
I just pushed a new branch sandbox/atmosphere, which provides integration of
the Atmosphere Framework (push/cometd) in Wicket. It works as follows: create
a component with a public method that takes an AjaxRequestTarget and an event
object (can be any type) and annotate it with
While I do agree with you that we could put experimental code in modules in
Wicket, I do not agree with you that all development should take place on
Apache Git servers. We no longer live in a centralized world. With Git,
development is a decentralized process, taking place on many locations by
to the Apache server
first, after which you can also push it to Github (it's open source after
all). This should keep everone happy. So expect a wicket-atmosphere sandbox
branch soon :)
Best regards,
Emond
On Monday 02 April 2012 15:11:45 Emond Papegaaij wrote:
While I do agree with you that we
Martijn and I want to release experimental things in different modules. For
that, they need to be stable enough to release, and it needs to be certain
that they will be continue to be supported for some time to come, but the code
does not need to be finished. For example, the code I'm currently
+1
On Friday 23 March 2012 14:33:30 Martin Grigorov wrote:
This vote is to release wicket 6.0.0-beta1.
This is the first release of 6.x branch and its purpose is to get more
feedback from
the community. There are no more planned changes in the API but if you
find something
that can be made
+1 for release, +1 for beta
On Tuesday 20 March 2012 12:21:38 Igor Vaynberg wrote:
+1 for release, +0 for beta vs milestone.
-igor
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
Since we are going to follow semver.org let's call it 6.0.0-beta1.
I believe
I totally agree. Wicket 6 is almost feature complete, and it's time for a
bigger audience to test it. I also agree on the second part: RCs should not
have API changes, and if they do, they should be very small and contained to
parts of the API that already changed between 1.5 and 6.
Emond
On
+1, our selenium tests run fine.
Emond
On Thursday 08 March 2012 10:37:02 Andrea Del Bene wrote:
Stateless page support works well now, +1 for me.
This vote is to release wicket 1.5.5
Branch
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/?p=wicket.git;a=shortlog;h=r
Agreed. We do still need some way to minimize the wicket javascript files as
part of the build process. Martin: you said you had some maven plugin for
this, right?
Emond
On Tuesday 21 February 2012 10:20:11 Igor Vaynberg wrote:
yeah, sounds good.
-igor
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:11 AM,
A simple tool to check this would be nice. We should try to keep the renaming
to a minimum. Problematic packages I've seen so far are:
o.a.w (in util)
o.a.w.request (in core and request)
o.a.w.util (in core and util)
o.a.w.serialize (in core and util)
Best regards,
Emond
On Tuesday 21 February
/diff/66e5dee5
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit: 66e5dee52a014cab24d80f6e3fd30a7d18efaf9e
Parents: ec9c3c7
Author: Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl
Authored: Mon Feb 20 17:04:32 2012 +0100
Committer: Emond Papegaaij papega...@apache.org
Committed: Mon Feb 20 17:06:21 2012
This is very easy to accomplish in 6.0. You only have to delete the code that
keeps the scripts separate when AJAX :). I can fix this, if you want?
Emond
On Wednesday 08 February 2012 16:44:14 Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet
ber...@step.polymtl.ca
. Removing
this check, will merge all evals into one.
One side note, the {}s are not added yet.
Emond
On Wednesday 08 February 2012 16:54:17 Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
This is very easy to accomplish in 6.0. You
, people often don't read the warnings or don't
care about them, and sometimes stuff can get nasty trying to support
both new ways and keep old ways around.
Just my 2c of course,
Eelco
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
I agree, so +1
to our Nexus admins to delete the jars and
re-download them. You may do the same if this applies to your company
too.
In the future I prefer to use 1.5.4-1, 1.5.4-2, etc. for such re-builds.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
-1
I'm
+1
Our selenium tests run fine and the previous bugs are fixed.
Emond
On Wednesday 18 January 2012 12:09:16 Martin Grigorov wrote:
+1
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
This vote is to release wicket 1.5.4 take 3
Branch
-1
I'm sorry to have to cancel this release again, but 1.5.4 contains a
regression introduced with WICKET-4256 (see WICKET-4340). If render
permissions are revoked on a page, the user will see an empty page, instead of
an AccessDeniedPage.
I found this regression debugging a failing testcase
Hi all,
The change for 4290 causes problems with mounted pages, especially when the
mount has parameters. For example, if you mount a page at
'mount/${param}/part2', links on that page will should get an url like
'mount/value/part2?0-1.ILinkListener-path-to-component', however with the
change
-1
The change for WICKET-4290 breaks links on mounted pages when page parameters
are used. I've added 2 testcases to illustrate the problem:
http://git-wip-
us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=wicket.git;a=commit;h=f5cae9496a9918d958c034cea18d5ff3f168d7d5
Emond
On Tuesday 10 January 2012 11:03:17 Igor
+1 for JSON
It's, much more natural to use JSON in JavaScript. You'll see that evaluating
the ajax responses will become much simpler if you use JSON.
I don't fully understand the blog post about the security problems. From what
I can see, you need to be able to render a mallicious script tag
I'm +0 for the rename. I understand that IAjaxRequestHandler is a better name
than AjaxRequestTarget, but it also involves quite a lot of work from our
users to fix their apps. You have to remember that they have to cope with all
renames at once, where you have the priviledge to deal with them
solution for this problem :(
johan
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 16:43, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nlwrote:
With git, switching between branches is very fast, but as you said, with
Eclipse it's not. You can have a look at this:
http://finik.net/2010/10/24/multiple-working-folders
that ? or turn that off?
i tried this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1510798/trying-to-fix-line-endings-with-g
it-filter-branch-but-having-no-luck/1511273#1511273
but still many many outgoing changes.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 14:09, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nlwrote
With git, switching between branches is very fast, but as you said, with
Eclipse it's not. You can have a look at this:
http://finik.net/2010/10/24/multiple-working-folders-with-single-git-
repository/
Another solution is to use git remotes to link the clones using (local)
remotes. You can add
December 2011 14:59:39 Martijn Dashorst wrote:
I am pleased to announce that the Wicket PMC has voted Emond Papegaaij
as our newest member. Please welcome him to our team!
Welcome Emond! Enjoy the New Year with Wicket!
Martijn
on JIRA, I guess WICKET-4000 and WICKET-4235 could
also be fixed with this. Some changes will be needed to header rendering to
let HeaderResponse render wicket:head header contributions, but that's no
problem for Wicket 6.
Best regards,
Emond Papegaaij
On Friday 02 December 2011 09:33:44 Emond
as is. It would be great if you could shed some
light on what the exact problem was, you were trying to solve with that code,
so I can make sure that it can also be solved with this new approach.
Best regards,
Emond Papegaaij
On Tuesday 22 November 2011 13:09:08 Martin Grigorov wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Hielke Hoeve hielke.ho...@topicus.nl
wrote:
Emond Papegaaij and I have also attempted to see if it is possible to
integrate a small part of WiQuery's functionality into Wicket. We are
still
Non-binding +1
I've been using SNAPSHOT for quite a while now, and all issues I discovered
are fixed in 1.5.3. We also ran our selenium tests against 1.5.3 and they
passed.
On Wednesday 09 November 2011 22:32:58 Peter Ertl wrote:
looking good for me
+1
Am 09.11.2011 um 21:14 schrieb
Even though we came up with the fix ourselves, it did not solve the problem
for us in all cases. The fix for 4080 fixed one of our apps, but the other
still is very broken. Someone with knowledge about domready in IE should
really look at this. We've abandoned wicket's domready and now use
in progress.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
Even though we came up with the fix ourselves, it did not solve the
problem for us in all cases. The fix for 4080 fixed one of our apps,
but the other still is very broken. Someone
.
Such built in logic could ofcourse be built into a new implementation
of the event.
**
Martin
2011/9/30 Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl:
This will not be applied before wicket.next. Until then, I think we
should really reconsider the current domready implementation on IE
knows how to handle ajax/non-ajax.
**
Martin
2011/9/30 Emond Papegaaij emond.papega...@topicus.nl:
IMHO, you should not use any ready event in AJAX, you should just
evaluate the statements after updating the DOM. AFAIC, this is what
AjaxHeaderResponse does for calls
It is your mapper that triggers this issue, therefore it is easy to work
around. You only have to prevent the code added for WIKCET-4014 from being
called, like this:
public Url mapHandler(IRequestHandler requestHandler) {
if (requestHandler instanceof ListenerInterfaceRequestHandler)
(non-binding) +1
Our application is running fine on 1.5.1. De reported issues are fixed, as far
as we could reproduce them.
Wrt WICKET-4087, I think this is a corner case and should be easy to work
around, because Bernard already has his own mapper. The change was introduced
with the fix for
The domready issue Martijn is talking about, is WICKET-4080, which I've just
created. A 1-line patch is attached.
And for what's worth, I'm changing my non-binding +1 to a -1 as well: non-
working AJAX submits with onsubmit handlers might break some of our apps.
Best regards,
Emond
On Friday
the requests in json format.
For this, I'd like to use Jackson rather than constructing the json by hand.
Does anyone have objections to adding an optional dependency to Jackson (ASL)
to wicket-extensions?
Best regards,
Emond Papegaaij
(non-binding) +1
I've been working with trunk for the past 2 weeks, without issues, or the
issues have been fixed.
On Wednesday 21 September 2011 10:40:15 Martin Grigorov wrote:
+1 to release
Tested:
- svn co + Maven build
- test wicket-examples (found just
(non-binding)
-1 untill WICKET-3989 is fixed, this breaks our app badly and is a regression
from rc5.1.
Emond
On Tuesday 23 August 2011 19:31:38 Igor Vaynberg wrote:
This vote is to release wicket 1.5-RC6
Branch: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/branches/wicket-1.5-RC6/
Artifacts:
On Wednesday 24 August 2011 10:30:02 Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
(non-binding)
-1 untill WICKET-3989 is fixed, this breaks our app badly and is a
regression from rc5.1.
in irc you said that the failing page
Although I really like having Weld available, I'm against putting it in 1.5.
The RC phase for 1.5 is already taking way too long and adding new
functionallity will not make it go faster. Another thing is that the current
wicket-weld is still immature. It does work, but the API is not yet
On Tuesday 23 August 2011 09:04:00 Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Emond Papegaaij
emond.papega...@topicus.nl wrote:
For example, objects managed by weld are not detached at the end
of a request.
erm? what is supposed to happen when?
-igor
That's something I'm
201 - 300 of 318 matches
Mail list logo
