WICKET-6105 was merged :)) I'm checking wicketstuff build :) On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> wrote:
> That's a plan! > > Sven > > > > Am 07.10.2017 um 18:16 schrieb Andrea Del Bene: > >> 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 >>> >>> > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
