Hi, Andreas, I'm not sure if there was a reason or not, but even if there was, pax-wicket was written for a (now) very old version of Wicket, so many things have changed since then.
I think if you believe the change is worthwhile, and if it does not cause any loss of functionality, then even if it causes an API change, you should just go for it. Cheers, =David On Apr 15, 2011, at 1:26 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote: > Hey guys, > > I hope that some of the initial creators of pax-wicket are still > following this list. Now that I'm diving deeper and deeper and > creating various use cases I come to the conclusion that it would be > much easier for clients to simply register an ApplicationFacotry in > the PaxWicketApplicationFactory creating and WicketApplication class > and registering an onInit and an onDestroy listener (since this cannot > be done directly in Wicket). Those methods could be provided in an > AbstractPaxWicketApplication class (which could be optionally used by > the clients). I've done a small prototype locally and couldn't see any > problems by this approach. All the work currently done directly in > PaxWicketApplication (and I always include > PaxAuthenticatedWicketApplication) could be done in the > PaxWicketApplicaionFactory (well, in the onInit and and onDestroy > listeners). I'm only hesitating commiting those changes because I'm > not sure y it was done in the way it is now for a specific reason. > > It would be really great why the current approach was chosen in the > beginning. I personally would prefer that the user directly registers > a WicketApplicationFactory in the PaxWicketApplicationFactory, because > that way we get PAXWICKET-10 for "free" and in addition it is much > easier to implement custom security models. > > Thanks for response and kind regards, > Andreas > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
