While I appreciate the effort in questioning our fundamentals and trying to improve even the oldest parts of our API, I don't think that the detach method is semantically wrong for models. Semantics are defined by what we say the semantics are. In a request/response oriented environment a detach is an essential part of the lifecycle of a request in general, and for models in particular.
Were Wicket a Swing framework, I would consider modifying the API, but as Wicket lives in an environment where the models only live during actual request processing, and are literally detached otherwise, IModel implementations should have detach behavior, and therefore the framework must guarantee that it can call the detach logic at appropriate times. Therefore IModels *are* IDetachable. So I don't think we should remove IDetachable from IModel as it is an essential, integral and semantically correct part of models. [X] No, keep IModel detachable. Martijn On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Emond Papegaaij <emond.papega...@topicus.nl> wrote: > Something went wrong sending this mail. I did write some more, but somehow my > mail client lost it. So here's the vote again: > > I think we are not going to agree on this proposal. I think it is not an > improvement and I do not agree with you that IModel should not be > detachable by default. So lets vote on this. > > [ ] Yes, remove IDetachable from IModel > [ ] No, keep IModel detachable > > My vote: > -1 keep IModel detachable > > Best regards, > Emond > > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
