I thought wicket extensions was for this type of code - a core minis project.
i'm happy we have the thoof contribution, but for wicket stuff I don't need to go through all the hoops of ip clearance. especially when we open up the floodgates for anyone to modify the code, which requires us to go through another IP clearance. the software grant is given on a particular revision, which is the version that Thoof (through Jonathan) has provided. When we modify the code outside of Apache, we nullify the grant, and have to do due dilligence all over when we want to include it in our core project again - hunting down contributors, getting their cla's on file, etc. I have no objections to putting it in extensions, but throwing it out to wicket stuff seems like throwing away a lot of my, Jonathan's and Ian's time. Martijn On 5/13/08, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i will not promise to maintain this. > > > Ok. So unless someone else of the committers wants to take > responsibility for at least the first few months, I think it should > start as a wicket-stuff project. And if it turns out it is relatively > bug (and feature request) free, we can consider to migrate it. > > Cheers, > > > Eelco > -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.3
