Sounds good. Thanks, John
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Emond Papegaaij <[email protected] > wrote: > John, > > It indeed works as the old module did. Igor explained what it was used for > and I made sure it still works the same. The main usecase is a component > on a single page instance which requires a conversation. The conversation > should live as long as the component is on the page. > > We also discussed if ConversationalComponent should be changed into an > annotation. I think it should have been an annotation from the start, but > changing it now would force users to change their code only for > aesthetics. The interface works fine, it only looks nicer if it were an > annotation. So we decided to keep it as is. > > Best regards, > Emond > > On Friday 10 January 2014 09:47:46 John Sarman wrote: > > Emond, > > Also it is very possible I misinterpreted how cdi-1.0 worked. I > personally > > believe that the auto conversation that is started should only end if the > > propagation rule fails, that is navigate to a new page that is a > > bookmarkable when propagation is set to NonBookmarkable, I read > through the > > cdi-1.0 code and it is basically cut and paste to the rewrite and placed > at > > the level so that the conversation is active without needing to use weld > > internals to activate it :) :) After reading it I may have mistakenly > > assumed that cdi-1.0 behaved like I described, I have not tested that. > If > > that is the case should we bring up a discussing to formally define what > > semantic controls propagation. That is if you choose to have wicket-cdi > > manage the conversation then every page needs to implement > > ConversationalComponent otherwise the conversation will be ended > even if it > > passes the propagation criteria. If you choose to manually begin and > end > > conversations, then only the propagation criteria dictates conversation > > propagation. > > > > Also we discussed removing the ConversationalComponent and making > that an > > Annotation. Is that still on the table? > > > > I am very impressed that you were able to remove the required > dependency of > > the cdi implementation. Glad you took the lead and made that happen. > > > > Thanks > > John > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:59 AM, John Sarman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Should the Conversation be ended immediately? So if someone uses > the > > > ConversationalComponent to automate the conversation.begin(), > does that > > > override the propagation if the next page that is navigated to does > not > > > > > > implement ConversationalComponent? I am just trying to understand > the new > > > > > > way of managing the Conversation as it differs from the Wicket Cdi-1.0 > > > pattern. In the 1.0 if a conversation was active and you navigated to > a > > > non bookmarkable page (assuming CdiConfiguration is configured with > the > > > default nonbookmarkable) then the Conversation would propagate > > > regardless > > > if the conversation was automatically managed or manually began. In > 1.0 > > > if > > > the conversation was managed by the wicket-cdi and you navigated to > a > > > bookmarkable page then wicket-cdi would not propagate the > Conversation and > > > call conversation.end(). > > > > > > Thanks, > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Emond Papegaaij < > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> The conversation is propagated, but also ended immediately. The > > >> TestNonConversationalPage is rendered with count = 3, but this > count is > > >> lost on the next increment (rendering of the page is a different > request > > >> as > > >> clicking the increment link). > > >> > > >> On Friday 10 January 2014 08:38:24 John Sarman wrote: > > >> > Emond, > > >> > I understand that. However whether the Conversation is began > > >> > > >> manually or > > >> > > >> > automatically should not dictate how the Conversation is > propagated. > > >> > In > > >> > the TestConversationalPage starts the conversation via the > > >> > ConversationalComponent interface then increments the counter. > The > > >> > > >> counter > > >> > > >> > increment does not call setResponsePage(). When the next Link is > > >> > > >> clicked, > > >> > > >> > setResponsePage(new TestNonConversationalPage()); is fired. > This is a > > >> > > > >> > non-bookmarkable page, but the Conversation is not propagated. > This > > >> > > >> means > > >> > > >> > that the ConversationPropagation is not working. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> > John > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Emond Papegaaij > > >> > > >> <[email protected] > > >> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi John, >
