On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:43 PM, James Carman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Should we wait 72 hours for the vote or I can move it tomorrow ? > > What was Martijn's official vote? If it was -1, that's a veto. Code > modifications (which this would be) can be vetoed.
I wouldn't veto this, but I don't think a lack of bug reports is an issue: it is a rather simple component that has a specific use case. I think it Just Works™ and there are not many issues to be found in it. Similarly to auth-roles, which is a decent, simple, focused project. I wouldn't want to move that out of wicket proper as well. I just don't see the benefit of moving it outside to wicket stuff, but see the benefits of having low maintenance code living near us and keeping us 'honest'. Incidentally Wicket Velocity is about the best documented project we have: http://wicket.apache.org/learn/projects/velocity.html Before we decide to remove it, I'd rather suggest moving undocumented projects to github... Or even better: *document* them. As for velocity usage, at our company I doubt we use it. I am not sure if we are going to use it, though we are going to migrate a baritus/velocity application towards Wicket, and we might use the velocity integration in that project. Though this would not depend on it residing at github or wicket proper. Martijn -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
