Just a thought which has been on my mind for a while but it's triggered again by this vote.
I consider wicketstuff to be a playground, where some projects are experimental - but there are also some projects which are more or fully mature and often used in production environments. Anyway I'm very hesitant to put wicketstuff projects inside production environments myself because of this "playground impression". Also the wiki and/or the lack of documentation to me is a confirmation of this impression. So, maybe it's worth a discussion whether we want something in between, to indicate a (wicketstuff) project is production-ready, recommended by core committers, to have some sort of quality indicator, etc. etc. As for the current situation with Wasp/Swarm given the two choices I'd vote for adopting it into Apache Wicket. But the situation may be different if we have an alternative. Antoine On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro <reier...@gmail.com> wrote: > Non binding. > > [x] adopt Wicket security into Apache Wicket > > OT: Maybe at some point adopting some of the best projects from Wicket Stuff > (e.g. inMethod grid) might be good for the community as releases will be > synchronized with releases of Wicket "core". > > Ernesto > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Martijn Dashorst < > martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Guys, >> >> I'd like to discuss the future of the Wicket Security project. >> Currently the project lives on/in the wicketstuff repository, but uses >> group id and package names "org.apache.wicket". IMO We should either: >> >> - adopt Wicket Security into the Wicket project and move everything >> over from Wicket Stuff into a subproject within Apache Wicket (and >> adopt the committers), or >> - keep Wicket Security at wicketstuff and move it into the fold of >> wicket stuff, including groupid/package rename. >> >> Since development on wicket security 1.4 is currently happening with a >> 1.4-beta1 just released, it is prudent to decide its future now (with >> a pending package rename). >> >> Considering that both the wicket security contributors and the Wicket >> PMC members are needed to make this happen, all their opinions are >> considered binding. >> >> [ ] adopt Wicket security into Apache Wicket >> [ ] keep Wicket security at Wicket Stuff >> >> Martijn >> >
