@Peter, i would say drop @SpringBean and use single notation for IOC regardless the module. In this case im in favor of using @Inject.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Peter Ertl-3 [via Apache Wicket] < ml-node+3777607-1439127942-65...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > - Introduce @WicketBean (as a replacement for @Inject, @SpringBean, etc.) > in wicket-ioc > > Am 30.08.2011 um 00:31 schrieb Brian Topping: > > > > > On Aug 29, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: > > > >> In order to start discussing what will constitute Wicket Next and > >> where we want to take our beloved framework, I'll start off with my > >> wish list: > >> > >> 1. Java 6 as a minimum requirement for *all* of wicket > >> 2. Servlet API 3.0 as a minimum requirement > >> 3. JavaEE 6 support for at least CDI > >> 4. Proper OSGi support > >> 5. Ajax refactoring to use JQuery and provide proper JQuery integration > in core > >> 6. Shorter release cycle > > > > 7. More granular modules that are released independently w/ version > ranges for dependencies. Addresses #6. > > 8. Modularized content management, allowing content to be loaded from > database or classpath, clustered, etc. > > 9. Modularized classloader whereby drop-ins can load from #8. > > > > Brian > > > > > > ------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > > http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Re-Roadmap-for-Wicket-6-tp3777539p3777607.html > To start a new topic under Apache Wicket, email > ml-node+1842946-398011874-65...@n4.nabble.com > To unsubscribe from Apache Wicket, click > here<http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=1842946&code=amNnYXJjaWFtQGdtYWlsLmNvbXwxODQyOTQ2fDEyNTYxMzc3ODY=>. > > -- JC -- View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Roadmap-for-Wicket-6-tp3777610p3777661.html Sent from the Forum for Wicket Core developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
