http://s.apache.org/wicket-servlet3-discuss
It has been proposed a couple of times for the roadmap for 6. There is no confusion between Emond and myself (at least for servlet 3, I won't comment on any confusion on other topics :-)). We both think that servlet 3 is out long enough and supported widely enough to move on (or he has changed his opinion since last I've seen him). Martijn On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Requiring Servlet 3.x as minimum version has never been in the scope > of Wicket 6. It is neither in the roadmap page nor there was any mail > discussion about this. > I think this is some confusion in/between you and Emond. He also > mentioned this few months ago in IRC. > > I see no reason to require Servlet 3.0 at this moment. Atmosphere > doesn't need it. > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Martijn Dashorst > <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> All, >> >> As I was preparing to build a final, I noticed that we don't yet have >> moved to servlet 3 in master. I thought that for the web socket stuff >> we needed to at least move to 3.0. I do see a commit in the history >> that adds servlet 3 done by Emond. I also see a commit reverting Jetty >> from jetty 8 to jetty 7 as jetty 8 requires servlet 3, also done by >> Emond. >> >> I wonder what the status is of our servlet 3 handling, is it still on >> the map for 6? We can't upgrade to 3 in 6.x after 6.0, so I'd rather >> move now than later. >> >> Martijn >> >> -- >> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > > > > -- > Martin Grigorov > jWeekend > Training, Consulting, Development > http://jWeekend.com -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
