-1 to add Weld now

+1 to add Weld and OSGi in 1.5.(1|2) if they don't need API changes to
be able to work. If they need API changes then they'll have to wait
for 1.6.
I also hope 1.6.0 will need less time than 1.4->1.5.

I'll revert WICKET-3976 soon.

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> bleh, this is turning into another prolonged discussion....
>
> why dont we just do this...release 1.5 and call it a day. weld can
> come in as a 1.5.1 or 1.5.2 addition - it doesnt touch any core code.
> osgi can wait for 1.6 where it can be implemented properly.
>
> i am changing my vote to -1 to include weld and -1 to include osgi.
> they all came in too late for 1.5 and i think i would rather push it
> out and worry about these things later.
>
> martin, revert the pom change you made for the osgi issue and i will
> build rc6 tomorrow. i think it has a good chance to become 1.5.0.
>
> -igor
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Brian Topping <[email protected]> wrote:
>> News flash:
>>
>> If you're going to include OSGi, go ahead and add Weld.  They are equally 
>> important.  Maybe not to you, but to some of us.
>>
>> Wicket 1.5 is not release candidate.  Features do not get added to release 
>> candidates.  Features do not even get added to alpha versions.  Read the 
>> Release Lifecycle 101 at 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle.
>>
>> If Wicket is not RC, then the features Wicket needs to be a viable release 
>> should be added.  OSGi is one of them, regardless of whether it's one of 
>> your personal favorites or not (and your opinions are pretty clear in the 
>> public record).
>>
>> I pushed for OSGi in 1.5 knowing full well that the RC moniker was a charade 
>> and that I am just as uneasy of waiting for it as you guys appear to be 
>> uneasy of waiting for Weld integration.
>>
>> If 1.5 is released, the next opportunity to add features that would cause 
>> the modules to be restructured is 1.6, not 1.5.1.
>>
>> The reality is the RC fantasy should be aborted and the cycle set back to 
>> "development mode" so features like Weld can be added and the *proper* work 
>> done to add OSGi -- both with necessary module restructurings.
>>
>> Then when that is done, freeze features and start fixing bugs.  That's 
>> called "alpha".  Etc etc.
>>
>> I'll be clear, I think the Apache process has failed on Wicket and if 
>> preferential treatment is given to Weld without proper OSGi support also 
>> going in, it's going to be an unmitigated disaster that is worthy of a 
>> review by the Apache board.  It may be worthy of a review in any event.
>>
>> Back to the regularly scheduled programming....
>>
>> On Aug 22, 2011, at 6:11 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>>
>>> Wicket Weld is a really nice to have for wicket 1.5 and would increase
>>> the importance of our release pretty considerably. The issue with
>>> wicket-weld is that it requires java 6, and it is late in the release
>>> game for 1.5 final.
>>>
>>> We have experience with building mixed java releases (see our 1.3
>>> history), though the build process was not pretty.
>>>
>>> In order to enable wicket-weld we need to do the following IMO:
>>> - create java5 and java6 modules in trunk, each configured with the
>>> correct java version
>>> - commit wicket-weld as a submodule for the java 6 module
>>> - move wicket-examples to java 6 module
>>> - move all other wicket modules to the java 5 module
>>> - fix the wicket parent pom to have a java 5 profile and a java 6 profile
>>> - fix the build script to run different maven setups utilizing a java
>>> 5 home directory and a java 6 home directory
>>> - fix the build script to run java 5 compilation first and then only
>>> java 6 for packaging (without clean) this will keep the java 5
>>> compiled classes and re-package them during the java 6 run
>>>
>>> This is some work, and as I said, we are late in the release game. If
>>> 1.5 final was this week I wouldn't propose to do this, but perhaps do
>>> it in 1.5.1 or 1.5.2. However, since 1.5-rc6 is still not complete we
>>> might do this now. I'm open to suggestions on whether to include
>>> wicket-weld or not.
>>>
>>> Martijn
>>>
>>> --
>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com

Reply via email to