I think the integration with wicketstuff prototype looks great. http://wicketstuff.org/jira/browse/WSCRIPTACULOUS-2
Feel free to check in the changes. I'd like to hold off on the repeater code for now though. I want to review that a bit more and try and create a new "sortable behavior" On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Sven Meier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Ryan, > > what about my patches? > Do you still want to review them or may I check the changes in by myself? > > Thanks > > Sven > > Sven Meier schrieb: > > Hello Ryan, >> >> I've created an issue in JIRA and attached a patch, so that >> wicketstuff-scriptaculous can utilize wicket-prototype. >> >> BTW >> - did you have time to check my other patch for sorting of arbitrary >> containers? >> - it seems that teamcity has to be adjusted for the new project location >> of wicketstuff-scriptaculous. >> - is it ok if I check in an udpated Eclipse project? It's still named >> "wicket-contrib-scriptaculous' and uses M2Elipse's >> MAVEN2_CLASSPATH_CONTAINER variable instead of M2_REPO. Or should we just >> remove it from the repository? >> >> Regards >> >> Sven >> >> Ryan Sonnek schrieb: >> >>> patches welcome. =) >>> >>> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 10:48 AM, richardwilko < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >
