Re: Markup Reloading
This is what I did and it seems to work alreadyl.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
public void onInstantiation(Component component) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
System.out.println(HELLO);
get().getMarkupSettings().getMarkupCache().clear();
}
});
igor.vaynberg wrote:
if wicket is in development mode it will reload resources on the fly.
if this is not working for you then something is not properly
configured, eg when you save your .css file your ide does not copy it
out of src folder into classes folder...
-igor
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 9:57 AM, carloc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Guys,
I've noticed that everytime I want to change something in my markup I
would
need to restart
the server as the changes don't take effect immediately. Is there
anything I
can do to avoid this behavior?
I'm trying to adjust my css and i'm spending more time restarting the
server...
Thanks
Carlo
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Markup-Reloading-tp15779009p15779009.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Markup-Reloading-tp15779009p15784708.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Markup Reloading
yeah well, that is a pretty extreme and unnecessary hack :)
not to mention it is not disabled in deployment mode...
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:13 AM, carloc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is what I did and it seems to work alreadyl.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener() {
public void onInstantiation(Component component) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
System.out.println(HELLO);
get().getMarkupSettings().getMarkupCache().clear();
}
});
igor.vaynberg wrote:
if wicket is in development mode it will reload resources on the fly.
if this is not working for you then something is not properly
configured, eg when you save your .css file your ide does not copy it
out of src folder into classes folder...
-igor
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 9:57 AM, carloc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Guys,
I've noticed that everytime I want to change something in my markup I
would
need to restart
the server as the changes don't take effect immediately. Is there
anything I
can do to avoid this behavior?
I'm trying to adjust my css and i'm spending more time restarting the
server...
Thanks
Carlo
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Markup-Reloading-tp15779009p15779009.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Markup-Reloading-tp15779009p15784708.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wicket id in component
On 2 Mar 2008, at 15:29, Igor Vaynberg wrote: a) components need to know their ids, they use them to generate markup id, etc. it could be passed to child.render(id) b) it is a space optimization. an array of components each with their own id is cheaper on ram/serialization space then a map. The field would just move from child to parent. Implementation could be just as efficient e.g. still using a single array to hold children but odd spaces are ids even spaces are children. im sure i could come up with a few more, what is really the advantage of having put(id,component) ? The advantage is being able to use constructor injection to compose pages John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wicket id in component
a) components need to know their ids, they use them to generate markup id, etc. b) it is a space optimization. an array of components each with their own id is cheaper on ram/serialization space then a map. im sure i could come up with a few more, what is really the advantage of having put(id,component) ? -igor On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 11:47 PM, John Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I haven't really thought this through but I was thinking that if the id of a component was not a member of a Component but set by the parent of the component then child components could be passed to the constructor of the parent. Instead of Component a = new Component(aid); parent.add(a); Having this: Component a = new Component(); parent.put(aid, a); It seems to me that a parent component behaves more like a map of child components than a list anyway. Are there reasons why it does not work this way? Sorry for what might be a very naive question. Thanks, John. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wicket id in component
On 2 Mar 2008, at 16:13, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:43 AM, John Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 2 Mar 2008, at 15:29, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
a) components need to know their ids, they use them to generate
markup id, etc.
it could be passed to child.render(id)
and to all the other 300 methods in Component that _may_ need it? it
doesnt scale...
If they may need it then the component could store it. Maybe onRender
() is not the place to set it but the earliest point that the parent
knows about it.
it is also a huge api break without a huge gain...
Enough said. I guess this is the cruncher.
b) it is a space optimization. an array of components each with
their
own id is cheaper on ram/serialization space then a map.
The field would just move from child to parent. Implementation
could
be just as efficient e.g. still using a single array to hold
children
but odd spaces are ids even spaces are children.
that will work
im sure i could come up with a few more, what is really the
advantage
of having put(id,component) ?
The advantage is being able to use constructor injection to compose
pages
first you have to realize that this is a corner case. doing
constructor injection with actual component instances is pretty rare.
I find myself wanting to do it quite often with side-bar panels that
contain a mix optional items
second, it is still possible. either using well known ids,
icomponentfactory { component create(string id);}, or wrapping passed
in components with something like:
class anypanel extends panel implements icomponentresolver {
public boolean resolve(final MarkupContainer container, final
MarkupStream markupStream,
final ComponentTag tag) {
if (container==thistag.getid().equals(_any_)) {
Component c=iterator().next();
c.render(markupStream);
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
wicket:paneldiv wicket:id=_any_/div/wicket:panel
then in your class
class mypage extends webpage {
public webpage(Component c1, Component c2) {
add(new anypanel(p1).add(c1));
add(new anypanel(p2).add(c2));
}
}
Thanks for the workaround. I'll give it a shot next time I am coding
pages.
John
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Wicket id in component
first you have to realize that this is a corner case. doing constructor injection with actual component instances is pretty rare. I find myself wanting to do it quite often with side-bar panels that contain a mix optional items I find that also - a whole branch of the page hierarchy need a particular side panel whereas another branch need a different side panel. Everything else - header, footer, menus etc., - remain pretty much constant. The solution I often find myself pining for is to be able to have more than one section in the markup that can be overridden in derived classes. (this is not the same as multiple inheritance and some wrongly assume). This makes the above very simple and very OO. This has been discussed at length on many occasions and recently spec'd out pretty accurately. Hopefully it will find its way into a not too distant release as the panel based workaround isn't as elegant, nor efficiently coded as a pure OO approach. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Strange thing in Application constructor
Hi,
while trying profiling and debugging our application (which seems to have
some memory leak problems) I've found a strange thing in the constructor of
org.apache.wicket.Application.
When the object is constructed a new component instantiation listener is
created with this code:
// Install default component instantiation listener that uses
// authorization strategy to check component instantiations.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
/**
* @see
org.apache.wicket.application.IComponentInstantiationListener#onInstantiation(org.apache.wicket.Component)
*/
public void onInstantiation(final Component component)
{
// If component instantiation is not authorized
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(
component.getClass()))
{
// then call any unauthorized component
instantiation
// listener
getSecuritySettings().getUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
.onUnauthorizedInstantiation(component);
}
}
});
But while having a look at the Session object I've found out that
getAuthorizationStrategy() is calling back Application:
/**
* @return The authorization strategy for this session
*/
public IAuthorizationStrategy getAuthorizationStrategy()
{
return
getApplication().getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy();
}
I wonder why it has been implemented in that way. Could this statement:
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
be rewritten as:
if
(!getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
??
-Roberto
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15786017.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TextArea problems
Hi. I have a form that contains a text area. I want to fill this with content fetch from a pojo. I do this by form.add(new TextArea(xxx, new PropertyModel(myPojoInstans, content)); When running the app this screws things up. Any components added before the TextArea are displayed correctly, but the content of the textarea will be the remainder of the html file. Am I doing something wrong? I have created a quickstart project, found here: http://www.jorgenpersson.se/TestTextArea2.tar.gz TIA, Jörgen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TextArea problems
Hi Jörgen, The textarea tag requires a close tag, rather than an open-close tag. Like this: form wicket:id=testTextAreaForm method=post textarea wicket:id=testTextArea rows=10 cols=30Content to be replaced by wicket/textarea /form Cheers, Jay On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 6:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I have a form that contains a text area. I want to fill this with content fetch from a pojo. I do this by form.add(new TextArea(xxx, new PropertyModel(myPojoInstans, content)); When running the app this screws things up. Any components added before the TextArea are displayed correctly, but the content of the textarea will be the remainder of the html file. Am I doing something wrong? I have created a quickstart project, found here: http://www.jorgenpersson.se/TestTextArea2.tar.gz TIA, Jörgen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Computer Science: solving today's problems tomorrow.
Re: TextArea problems
Thank Jay. It's always so simple :) /Jörgen Jay Hogan skrev: Hi Jörgen, The textarea tag requires a close tag, rather than an open-close tag. Like this: form wicket:id=testTextAreaForm method=post textarea wicket:id=testTextArea rows=10 cols=30Content to be replaced by wicket/textarea /form Cheers, Jay On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 6:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I have a form that contains a text area. I want to fill this with content fetch from a pojo. I do this by form.add(new TextArea(xxx, new PropertyModel(myPojoInstans, content)); When running the app this screws things up. Any components added before the TextArea are displayed correctly, but the content of the textarea will be the remainder of the html file. Am I doing something wrong? I have created a quickstart project, found here: http://www.jorgenpersson.se/TestTextArea2.tar.gz TIA, Jörgen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Howto? Wicket, Maven, and multiple Eclipse Java projects
On 24 Feb 2008, at 13:35, Martin Makundi wrote: first I'd ask, why do you hesitate to install the Libraries to your local repository? I am in prototyping phase and being new to wicket it is a mess ;) I consider it more flexible and less messy not to install such jars into maven repository - their expected lifetime is too short to be worth the trouble. Don't think this - your local repository is meant to catch anything and many people feel it is god practice to wipe it now and again anyhow. It is easy enough to remove stuff if you decide that there is too much history that sucks :) Andy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange thing in Application constructor
it is that way so you can have a different auth strategy per session
by overriding sesssion.getauthstrat()
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Roberto Fasciolo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
while trying profiling and debugging our application (which seems to have
some memory leak problems) I've found a strange thing in the constructor of
org.apache.wicket.Application.
When the object is constructed a new component instantiation listener is
created with this code:
// Install default component instantiation listener that uses
// authorization strategy to check component instantiations.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
/**
* @see
org.apache.wicket.application.IComponentInstantiationListener#onInstantiation(org.apache.wicket.Component)
*/
public void onInstantiation(final Component component)
{
// If component instantiation is not
authorized
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(
component.getClass()))
{
// then call any unauthorized
component instantiation
// listener
getSecuritySettings().getUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
.onUnauthorizedInstantiation(component);
}
}
});
But while having a look at the Session object I've found out that
getAuthorizationStrategy() is calling back Application:
/**
* @return The authorization strategy for this session
*/
public IAuthorizationStrategy getAuthorizationStrategy()
{
return
getApplication().getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy();
}
I wonder why it has been implemented in that way. Could this statement:
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
be rewritten as:
if
(!getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
??
-Roberto
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15786017.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange thing in Application constructor
Swarm for instances uses the strategy per session technique to also
store the user credentials in the strategy.
Maurice
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it is that way so you can have a different auth strategy per session
by overriding sesssion.getauthstrat()
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Roberto Fasciolo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
while trying profiling and debugging our application (which seems to have
some memory leak problems) I've found a strange thing in the constructor
of
org.apache.wicket.Application.
When the object is constructed a new component instantiation listener is
created with this code:
// Install default component instantiation listener that
uses
// authorization strategy to check component
instantiations.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
/**
* @see
org.apache.wicket.application.IComponentInstantiationListener#onInstantiation(org.apache.wicket.Component)
*/
public void onInstantiation(final Component
component)
{
// If component instantiation is not
authorized
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(
component.getClass()))
{
// then call any unauthorized
component instantiation
// listener
getSecuritySettings().getUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
.onUnauthorizedInstantiation(component);
}
}
});
But while having a look at the Session object I've found out that
getAuthorizationStrategy() is calling back Application:
/**
* @return The authorization strategy for this session
*/
public IAuthorizationStrategy getAuthorizationStrategy()
{
return
getApplication().getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy();
}
I wonder why it has been implemented in that way. Could this statement:
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
be rewritten as:
if
(!getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
??
-Roberto
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15786017.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wicket Jquery Weird Behavior
Hi guys I've just found this out...
When I use the $ function of jquery directly within my page, it's causing my
page to be cosntructed twice.
I included something like
$(function() {
$('#leftFrame').css('z-index', 200);
});
It's causing my page to reload twice.
I was trying to find out what's causing my page to have multiple queries and
it turns out to be this.
I even placed logs in the constructor to see if it was called twice and it
was actually called twice.
Anyone experienced this ?
I used jQuery.noConflict() and the problem was solved
Does it have something to do with Wicket using $ also?
Carlo
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/wicket-Jquery-Weird-Behavior-tp15792923p15792923.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
YUI integration?
Hi: I wonder if there is a plan to integrate YUI into wicket. or any other JS lib. YUI seems to be a nice fit with its license and number of widgets. Since wicket is already using its calendar, so would it be rational approach to adopt the rest of YUI ? Thanks
Re: wicket Jquery Weird Behavior
we namespace all of our javascript, so i dont think we use $ but Wicket.$
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:48 PM, carloc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys I've just found this out...
When I use the $ function of jquery directly within my page, it's causing my
page to be cosntructed twice.
I included something like
$(function() {
$('#leftFrame').css('z-index', 200);
});
It's causing my page to reload twice.
I was trying to find out what's causing my page to have multiple queries and
it turns out to be this.
I even placed logs in the constructor to see if it was called twice and it
was actually called twice.
Anyone experienced this ?
I used jQuery.noConflict() and the problem was solved
Does it have something to do with Wicket using $ also?
Carlo
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/wicket-Jquery-Weird-Behavior-tp15792923p15792923.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
there are a whole bunch of js lib integrations in wicket-stuff -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi: I wonder if there is a plan to integrate YUI into wicket. or any other JS lib. YUI seems to be a nice fit with its license and number of widgets. Since wicket is already using its calendar, so would it be rational approach to adopt the rest of YUI ? Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Howto? Wicket, Maven, and multiple Eclipse Java projects
Not quite an expert on maven...but have you taken a look at maven's module configuration? I have setup a parent directory that links all the necessary modules. This parent pom needs to be of packaging type pom to nest other modules. For example: Directory structure of the following: arch/ app/ + app-domain/ + app-main-wicket/ + app-admin-wicket/ app/pom.xml would have the following modules defined modules module../arch/module moduleapp-domain/module moduleapp-main-wicket/module moduleapp-admin-wicket/module /modules There probably is another way to do this but it works for us. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Howto--Wicket%2C-Maven%2C-and-multiple-Eclipse-Java-projects-tp15661736p15793418.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wicket Tester And OpenSessionInView
Hi , I seem to be getting this Exception when I run integration tests using WicketTester... I use lazy objects through the opensessioninviewfilter. How can I get WicketTester to use this filter? Is there anyway that this could be resolved? org.hibernate.LazyInitializationException: could not initialize proxy - no Session -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Tester-And-OpenSessionInView-tp15793421p15793421.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Wicket web.xml configuration settings and maven
Thanks all for the input. I didn't use resource filter but did use maven profiles which worked just find for our needs. Is there any issues with using profiles over resource filter? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OT%3A-Wicket-web.xml-configuration-settings-and-maven-tp15744999p15793424.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
wicket is a java server side framework -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I meant if the core wicket team would adopt it as part of its core to (quickly) produce many widgets like the datepicker. YUI project on wicket-stuff is not very active and leaves a lof uncertainty. there are a whole bunch of js lib integrations in wicket-stuff -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi: I wonder if there is a plan to integrate YUI into wicket. or any other JS lib. YUI seems to be a nice fit with its license and number of widgets. Since wicket is already using its calendar, so would it be rational approach to adopt the rest of YUI ? Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
Have you taken a look at wicket-contrib-yui? There are already a few YUI integrated components built. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/YUI-integration--tp15793009p15793412.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wicket Tester And OpenSessionInView
One thing is to run each test in a single transaction. This way the session will remain open. I tend to use Spring for this (see http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.5.x/reference/testing.html#testcontext-tx. ). If you are not using Spring you could start a transaction yourself. Hop this helps. Lars On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 10:34 PM, carloc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi , I seem to be getting this Exception when I run integration tests using WicketTester... I use lazy objects through the opensessioninviewfilter. How can I get WicketTester to use this filter? Is there anyway that this could be resolved? org.hibernate.LazyInitializationException: could not initialize proxy - no Session -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-Tester-And-OpenSessionInView-tp15793421p15793421.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wicke quickstart
still there in svn, and there is also a maven archetype...http://wicket.apache.org/quickstart.html -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Back in 1.2.4 days there was a fully self contained wicket quickstart zip that contained everything needed to build and deploy some sample wicket apps to a servlet container. Is there any such zip for 1.3.x? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: wicke quickstart
I found the wicket-examples directory in the wicket 1.3.1 zip. We've got that building an running now. Thanks, Chris still there in svn, and there is also a maven archetype...http://wicket.apache.org/quickstart.html -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Back in 1.2.4 days there was a fully self contained wicket quickstart zip that contained everything needed to build and deploy some sample wicket apps to a servlet container. Is there any such zip for 1.3.x? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
I saw it but it did not seem to very active. Besides, it would be nice that wicket core team adopt a js lib as many frontend functions have to use js, like datepicker. It would make sense to me to expand it to make wicket more powerful and easy to use. Have you taken a look at wicket-contrib-yui? There are already a few YUI integrated components built. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/YUI-integration--tp15793009p15793412.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: there are a whole bunch of js lib integrations in wicket-stuff Is it possible to update the wicket-contrib-yui to version 2.5.0? Regards, Edward Yakop - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: maven surefile issue
mvn -Dmaven.test.skip=true will turn off the tests -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We store markup in a separate external directory to the source code and it works all well compiling under ant but we're now compiling wicket-examples using maven and we've moved the markup into an external directory and maven now complains that the markup files can't be found. Is there a way to turn off that surefire thing? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
maven surefile issue
We store markup in a separate external directory to the source code and it works all well compiling under ant but we're now compiling wicket-examples using maven and we've moved the markup into an external directory and maven now complains that the markup files can't be found. Is there a way to turn off that surefire thing? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: YUI integration?
We don't prefer one framework over the other. Some like jquery, others like dojo or prototype/mootools/scriptaculous/rico. Favoring YUI over the others will put us in a corner. Martijn On 3/3/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I saw it but it did not seem to very active. Besides, it would be nice that wicket core team adopt a js lib as many frontend functions have to use js, like datepicker. It would make sense to me to expand it to make wicket more powerful and easy to use. Have you taken a look at wicket-contrib-yui? There are already a few YUI integrated components built. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/YUI-integration--tp15793009p15793412.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: maven surefile issue
Or don't store the markup in an external directory. It will make building reusable components a lot harder. Martijn On 3/3/08, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mvn -Dmaven.test.skip=true will turn off the tests -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We store markup in a separate external directory to the source code and it works all well compiling under ant but we're now compiling wicket-examples using maven and we've moved the markup into an external directory and maven now complains that the markup files can't be found. Is there a way to turn off that surefire thing? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: maven surefile issue
Or don't store the markup in an external directory. It will make building reusable components a lot harder. ...and make it mandatory to bounce the enterprise web app whenever a designer makes a change to the markup which is not an option for this app unfortunately. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: maven surefile issue
if you are really deploying new markup often in an enterprise app then perhaps you shouldve used IMarkupCacheKeyProvider and IMarkupResourceStreamProvider to make wicket load the markup from db and obtain proper cache keys -igor On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or don't store the markup in an external directory. It will make building reusable components a lot harder. ...and make it mandatory to bounce the enterprise web app whenever a designer makes a change to the markup which is not an option for this app unfortunately. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mixing bread crumb and normal links
Is there a way to mix bread crumb and normal links. I don't want the
normal links to append a crumb to the bread crumb bar, but I want the
bread crumb bar to remain on the page. I have a home page with a
bread crumb link to my modified version of the navomatic example.
Following that link I get a bread crumb bar Home / Navomatic. I
want that bar to remain constant as I click the Page1, Page2, and
Page3 navomatic links. The Home link works on the initial Navomatic
page, but after I follow one of the navomatic links the home link
breaks (it updates the bread crumb bar correctly to Home, but
doesn't change the content panel to the home page). I noticed that
the link changes after I click on one of the navomatic links...
?wicket:interface=:0:breadCrumbBar:crumbs:0:crumb:link:9:ILinkListener::
?wicket:interface=:18:breadCrumbBar:crumbs:0:crumb:link::ILinkListener::
Here are some code snippets...
HomePage extends WebPage
BreadCrumbBar breadCrumbBar = new
BreadCrumbBar(breadCrumbBar);
BreadCrumbPanel contentPanel = new HomePanel(CONTENT_PANEL,
breadCrumbBar);
breadCrumbBar.setActive(contentPanel);
add(breadCrumbBar);
add(contentPanel);
HomePanel extends BreadCrumbPanel
add(new BreadCrumbPanelLink(navomatic, this, Page1.class));
Page1 extends NavomaticPanel
NavomaticPanel extends BreadCrumbPanel
public NavomaticPanel(String id, IBreadCrumbModel breadCrumbModel) {
super(id, breadCrumbModel);
final BreadCrumbBar breadCrumbBar = (BreadCrumbBar)
breadCrumbModel;
ListLink links = new LinkedListLink();
links.add(link(page1Link, breadCrumbBar, Page1.class));
links.add(link(page2Link, breadCrumbBar, Page2.class));
links.add(link(page3Link, breadCrumbBar, Page3.class));
add(new NavomaticBorder(navomaticBorder, links));
}
private static Link link(final String id, final BreadCrumbBar
breadCrumbBar, final Class? extends NavomaticPanel panelClass) {
return new Link(id) {
public void onClick() {
setResponsePage(new
NavomaticPage(breadCrumbBar, panelClass));
}
};
}
NavomaticBorder extends Border
BoxBorder navBorder = new BoxBorder(navigationBorder);
add(navBorder);
for (Link link : links) {
navBorder.add(link);
}
NavomaticPage extends WebPage
add(breadCrumbBar);
Constructor? extends NavomaticPanel constructor =
panelClass.getConstructor(String.class, IBreadCrumbModel.class);
NavomaticPanel contentPanel =
constructor.newInstance(CONTENT_PANEL, breadCrumbBar);
add(contentPanel);
--
Brian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to write unicode in Response.write(unidcode)?
Hi£¡ Can I write unicode in Respose? just like, Response response = request.getResponse(); response.write(UNICODE here...); Thanks a lot! :- -Kevin Liu - Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
Re: Strange thing in Application constructor
So, what are the responsibilities of the class org.apache.wicket.Session and
what's the contract between Session and org.apache.wicket.Application?
I'm asking because to me both them are a bit unclear (and the javadocs can't
help me in understand them at all).
-Roberto
igor.vaynberg wrote:
it is that way so you can have a different auth strategy per session
by overriding sesssion.getauthstrat()
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Roberto Fasciolo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
while trying profiling and debugging our application (which seems to
have
some memory leak problems) I've found a strange thing in the constructor
of
org.apache.wicket.Application.
When the object is constructed a new component instantiation listener is
created with this code:
// Install default component instantiation listener that
uses
// authorization strategy to check component
instantiations.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
/**
* @see
org.apache.wicket.application.IComponentInstantiationListener#onInstantiation(org.apache.wicket.Component)
*/
public void onInstantiation(final Component
component)
{
// If component instantiation is not
authorized
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(
component.getClass()))
{
// then call any unauthorized
component instantiation
// listener
getSecuritySettings().getUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
.onUnauthorizedInstantiation(component);
}
}
});
But while having a look at the Session object I've found out that
getAuthorizationStrategy() is calling back Application:
/**
* @return The authorization strategy for this session
*/
public IAuthorizationStrategy getAuthorizationStrategy()
{
return
getApplication().getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy();
}
I wonder why it has been implemented in that way. Could this statement:
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
be rewritten as:
if
(!getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
??
-Roberto
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15786017.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15798693.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange thing in Application constructor
session represents a user's session, while application represents the
application that users access.
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 11:03 PM, Roberto Fasciolo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, what are the responsibilities of the class org.apache.wicket.Session and
what's the contract between Session and org.apache.wicket.Application?
I'm asking because to me both them are a bit unclear (and the javadocs can't
help me in understand them at all).
-Roberto
igor.vaynberg wrote:
it is that way so you can have a different auth strategy per session
by overriding sesssion.getauthstrat()
-igor
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Roberto Fasciolo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
while trying profiling and debugging our application (which seems to
have
some memory leak problems) I've found a strange thing in the constructor
of
org.apache.wicket.Application.
When the object is constructed a new component instantiation listener is
created with this code:
// Install default component instantiation listener that
uses
// authorization strategy to check component
instantiations.
addComponentInstantiationListener(new
IComponentInstantiationListener()
{
/**
* @see
org.apache.wicket.application.IComponentInstantiationListener#onInstantiation(org.apache.wicket.Component)
*/
public void onInstantiation(final Component
component)
{
// If component instantiation is not
authorized
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(
component.getClass()))
{
// then call any unauthorized
component instantiation
// listener
getSecuritySettings().getUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
.onUnauthorizedInstantiation(component);
}
}
});
But while having a look at the Session object I've found out that
getAuthorizationStrategy() is calling back Application:
/**
* @return The authorization strategy for this session
*/
public IAuthorizationStrategy getAuthorizationStrategy()
{
return
getApplication().getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy();
}
I wonder why it has been implemented in that way. Could this statement:
if
(!Session.get().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
be rewritten as:
if
(!getSecuritySettings().getAuthorizationStrategy().isInstantiationAuthorized(component.getClass()))
??
-Roberto
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15786017.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Strange-thing-in-Application-constructor-tp15786017p15798693.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
