OK, then I'll commit and push.

Martijn

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote:
> This looks handy!
> I'm +1 to have it in -core.
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Using this class I was able to migrate our 7 invocations within a
>> couple of minutes.
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > So instead of re-introducing the constructors, we could opt to provide
>> > a utility that makes it easy to refactor code to the new fluent API,
>> > and document its use in the migration guide.
>> >
>> > For example:
>> >
>> > https://gist.github.com/dashorst/5ae5ebcdedab9da34792
>> >
>> > We could create a wicket-migrate-7.x module to add more of these
>> > classes if necessary/useful. But for convenience they should be in
>> > core.
>> >
>> > Martijn
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>> By reverting the constructors from 6.x we will reintroduce
>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4972
>> >>
>> >> In our 1.2M lines of code project, there are only 7 invocations of the
>> >> StringResourceModel constructor that I have to figure out, so this is
>> >> (for our company at least) a minor issue. I can imagine that
>> >> internationalized apps will have a bigger problem.
>> >>
>> >> I don't know how to handle WICKET-4972. The way it was in Wicket 7
>> >> broke silently for us, while the situation from Wicket 6.19 and prior
>> >> was working.
>> >>
>> >> Martijn
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>



-- 
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com

Reply via email to