Sven, according to my information you have write access to the wicketstuff svn why don't you create the project yourself. One of the tc admins will then put it in teamcity. One thing though, Martijn and i talked about naming conventions for wicketstuff projects and we agreed we did not like wicket-contrib-...... We prefer wicketstuff-....... (or wicket-...... if you have big aspirations :)) as it brings all projects closer together and helps us give a more professional/consistent feeling to the whole of wicketstuff in the long run. A common maven group id is part of that. Not saying everyone should change there projectname immediately :) but it would be appreciated if you would consider it for the next release or so :).
As for the prototype project i have no strong opinion about this, but if you do this for prototype then why not for other js libs too? Something to keep in the back of your mind when you create the project :) As for wicket-security using prototype, that's just the examples but i would not mind using this project instead of including it manually. I am not sure how much of prototype i use anyway. Guess that is something to investigate when i clean them up :) Maurice On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Sven Meier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > @Ryan > thanks for stepping in. Since scriptaculous depends heavily on prototype, it > would be nice to have your project supporting my proposal. > > @Richard > If your project needs a custom version of prototype, could you build and use > a custom wicket-prototype package? Or we could make the new header > contributer configurable (e.g. through a context setting) where it should > load the javascript from. > > So, do we need a vote for this? If not, could one of the committers please > set up a new project "wicket-contrib-prototype"? > > I could then check in a single class PrototypeHeaderContributor accompanied > by prototype.js. > All projects that want to join this standardization just have to add a maven > dependency and let their components use the new header contributor. > The following projects have the script included currently: > wicket-contrib-scriptaculous > pickwick > wicket-security > wicketstuff-lightbox > wicket-flickr > wicketstuff-minis has a documented dependency (and there might be others > too) > > Of course wicket users who want to enhance their own components with some > prototype javascript can use the new project directly in their pages. > > Regards > > Sven > > Ryan Sonnek schrieb: >> >> I'm open to suggestions. The scriptaculous project is coupled to >> prototype, >> but i don't have an issue with depending on a separate project for the >> prototype scripts. >> >> On 5/16/08, richardwilko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>> hi, >>> >>> I wrote wicket prototip integration, (its in wicket-stuff-minis). >>> >>> I decided to leave out the prototype js for a couple of reasons: >>> >>> 1) so i didnt have to keep up with prototype releases (yes lazy i know) >>> 2) because in my wicket app we make heavy use of prototype all over the >>> app, >>> and we have a customised version of the prototype / script.aculo.us files >>> that we need all bundled into a single minified javascript file, however >>> if >>> we run in development mode we include the non-minified single files to >>> help >>> with debugging. I also had to add a minor fix to the prototype lib >>> because >>> of Microsoft virtual earth. >>> >>> It might be an idea to be able to override the prototype/script.aculo.us >>> header contributor if the user requires it, but include it if not. >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> svenmeier wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> currently we don't have a clear solution how to handle a dependency on >>>> prototype: >>>> - wicket-contrib-scriptaculous includes its own script file >>>> - other subprojects have a comment 'you need to include prototype.js by >>>> yourself' >>>> - if I work on my own custom components, I need to include prototype.js >>>> >>> >>> or >>> >>>> >>>> rely on other components to include the javascript for me. >>>> >>>> IMHO we should have a new project wicket-contrib-prototype, which sole >>>> purpose is to provide prototype.js as a JavascriptResourceReference. >>>> This >>>> would give us a clear dependecy in a project's pom. >>>> >>>> What to you think? >>>> >>>> Sven >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/wicket-contrib-prototype---tp17270378p17270834.html >>> >>> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
