I think the option for setting your own javascript file location is a must,
that way most people can just use the bundled prototype, but if you have
specific needs then you can easily override it.

Richard


svenmeier 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>
>>   
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/wicket-contrib-prototype---tp17270378p17304384.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to