Hi again
I think it would be nice somehow to clarify these differences for
users:) So they know what to expect of components, or have some indication.
I guess some of the trouble are tracking which projects are still alive
on wicketstuff, whether some are highly active others are not... I guess
major changes in wicket will at some point break the "dead" wicket stuff
things etc..
regards..
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Well, first of all, there aren't really any fast and hard rules when
it comes to wicket-stuff projects. I'd call them guidelines of even
suggestions. :-)
Wicket stuff minis= small project / one behavior or something like that..
Yeah. I can't really speak for Igor (who set up the project if I'm
correct), but I believe the idea behind it is meant for neat
components and behaviors that are too small for a separate project.
Kind of like wicket-extensions but for wicket-stuff.
Wicket stuff seperate project = non core commiter and/or?
Wicket stuff in general = non apache compatible license.
* Projects for non committers
* Projects that have external dependencies from what we already use
for the core projects (whether the licenses are compatible or not...
we obviously would prefer licenses to always be compatible).
* Projects that need time to mature before we'd consider them for core
projects. The Spring integration projects for instance started out
like that.
* Projects that we (or anyone else for that matter) like to share
without too much pressure on maintaining them. Of course, everyone
should try to at least make a basic effort to maintain whatever they
committed, but the pressure for doing that is more urgent (at least
imho) for core projects.
Eelco
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
