On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]>wrote:
> yes, but *why* did you want to do this? the reasoning for all this was > to optimize the space usage in http session. this was legacy from > before the disk store days. once the disk store was introduced these > kinds of optimizations became obsolete. > There are still a few holdouts that don't (or can't) use the HttpSessionStore, but as you indicate below, I agree that they are the vast minority. i would prefer keeping all this out of the core. 99% of applications > that are built can support the disk store. all these optimizations are > only needed if you cannot support the disk store and want to store > everything in http session. > > what you have described sounds likely to complicate the internal quiet > a bit, for questionable gain. > > that said, i dont think there is anything stopping you from > implementing this as a separate module outside the core. > Agreed. If I end up tackling this, I'll start it as an outside module. If people express an interest in it, I can port it into our repo, but still as a separate submodule. -- Jeremy Thomerson http://wickettraining.com *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
