Hi Emond,
> TL;DR Vote at the bottom What does it mean? That your email can be skipped to the voting part or that I was prolix in my last email? > I think we are not going to agree on this proposal. No problem. Having different opinions being discussed is just a sign of a healthy project. Carl, Indeed, and it's really nice to get you option on this. I also see this as a tradeoff situation. Martijn, > models only live during > actual request processing They live longer. They even implement IClusterable (IDetachable's superinterface) to do so. IClusterable being IDetachable's superinterface is a living paradox for me. [x] Yes, remove IDetachable from IModel Pedro Santos On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >
