+1 for removing 'I'. I personally do like it but since this is what the committers prefer than I'm fine.
-1 for renaming Model to anything else. @Erik: it'd be interesting to be at a course of jWeekend where you'll explain to the attendees "Wicket consists of components, models, ... and the basic model is Locator (and all implementations end with **Model)". I'll find it confusing. I hope Wicket 1.5 will not rename all existing Model implementations. A side note: some third party projects already depends on 'I' classes. For example Terracotta depends on IClusterable for its Wicket module. Take this into account as well. El dom, 04-10-2009 a las 13:55 +0200, Erik van Oosten escribió: > I agree, the I is useless. Provided there is a good migration I'd say: +1. > > I also agree with Martin, lets change IModel to Locator while we're at it! > > Regards, > Erik. > > > Igor Vaynberg wrote: > > is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket > > has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this > > convention, is it time for a change? > > > > this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh > > aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch. > > > > -igor > > > >
