Hi Rafael, I'll check your quickstart app soon. As you can see other people also think your suggested changes are not really needed.
The main problem with your use case is the usage of custom threads where Wicket's Application and RequestCycle thread locals are not available. Using IModel as feedback message is not a problem at all at the moment. You may take a look at - Java https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/blob/master/jdk-1.6-parent/minis-parent/minis/src/main/java/org/wicketstuff/minis/model/FutureModel.java?source=cc - Scala https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/blob/master/jdk-1.6-parent/scala-extensions-parent/wicket-scala/src/main/scala/org/wicketstuff/scala/FutureModel.scala?source=cc I think this may solve your use case. On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Rafael W. <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I would like to put https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5353 to > dicussion. Attached, you can find an example of a Wicket application that > would benefit from that change. (Simly run wicket-async-task-demo with > jetty:run in Maven.) > > Generally, I want feedback messages to be represented by models rather > than by Serializables in order to allow more multithreading in Wicket. The > example contains a simple progress bar component where tasks are run in > background threads in order to keep the Wicket application responsive. (I > mostly use Wicket in Desktop-style applications where the attached > component is tremendously useful for me.) > > The problem with the Serializable solution for feedback messages is that > the messages have to be assembled at the time the error occurs, not at the > time the message is to be displayed. In my believe, this is a misconception > that can easily be corrected. I described the topic further in the Jira > issue above. > > Thank you for your feedback. > Regards, Rafael Winterhalter > >
