Sure we should! But I'd like not to break the build when we will merge (hopefully soon) WICKET-6105. After we have merged it we will have all the time to migrate the code to the new extensions module.
On Oct 7, 2017 5:32 PM, "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> wrote: > This make sense :) > I'll try to find some time and check some of these modules > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > IMHO we should set a good example by migrating these modules to use the > new > > classes in wicket-extensions. > > We don't want to provide support for wicket-datetime forever, do we? > > > > Regards > > Sven > > > > > > > > Am 07.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Andrea Del Bene: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> WicketStuff is currently depending on Wicket 'wicket-datetime' for three > >> subprojects: > >> > >> - wicket-scala > >> > >> - inmethod-grid > >> > >> - wicketstuff-portlet-examples > >> > >> I think we should replace it with the corresponding module we have > >> migrated to WicketStuff. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > > > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax >
