+1
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:56 AM, Andrea Del Bene
wrote:
> +1 for me too
>
>
>
> On 18/08/2016 00:47, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
>> Sounds good to me
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>> On Wednesday, 17 August 2016, Martin Grigorov
>> wrot
[1] to showcase the idea and to get your thoughts while
resolving WICKET-6219 in wicket-7.x branch.
cheers,
Pedro Santos
1 - https://github.com/apache/wicket/tree/WICKET-6219-no-fragment-resolver
be: "type-name". So we would have:
class MyFragment extends Fragment {
...
super(id, MyFragment.class.getSimpleName(), markupContainer);
...
}
What are your thought?
Cheers
Pedro Santos
Martijn, thanks! I put my thoughts on the id change in a different thread.
Giving it a closer look, I no longer see a relation with the rendering
change.
Martin, Ernesto, Andrea, thanks! All tests are welcome. Really happy that
it worked fine there, Martin.
Cheers,
Pedro Santos
Pedro Santos
s);
...
I would prefer the following usage in the .xhtml
...
...
rather than
...
...
1 - https://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#id
Pedro Santos
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 4:34 AM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> In both examples you make the assumption that there is a concrete cla
I searched of MarkupStream#hasMore usages inside Wicket Stuff, which should
give a good idea of how often this method is used, and I think it's safe to
apply the fix on the 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches.
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 2:01 AM, wrote:
> Repository: wicket
> Updat
Hi Martin,
Indeed, thx. Just removed the duplicated dependencies. I noticed that we
have a few more redundant scopes across 6.x, 7.x and master branches; will
run a larger cleanup later so we can have a meaningful setup inside
.
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Martin Grigorov
he release change log looks enough to me.
Any dev using Wicket to parse and iterate a markup would have ran in the
same problem. As WICKET-6165 is the first ticket I see on this matter, it
looks like this steam API, even being public, wasn't being used outside
Wicket core.
cheers
Pedro Santos
ommit message since the change
rather adds the isCurrentIndexInsideTheStream method next to the current
hasMore method than to rename hasMore to isCurrentIndexInsideTheStream.
cheers
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 3:08 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMHO this change should *not* be
-api-improvement
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:09 AM, Pedro Santos wrote:
> Hi Sven,
>
> I think you meant the bug fix shouldn't be backported given this change is
> both a bug fix and a consistency improvement, and that the consistency
> improvement can indeed be mer
Hi Martin, thx!
In this case I need to make sure of to set a default locale before
instantiate the tester. But actually I can add this in a @BeforeAll and
still extend from WicketTestCase. Will improve the test next.
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
>
//commons.apache.org/proper/commons-ognl/language-guide.html
cheers
Pedro Santos
he property
expression resolution inside PropertyResolver, not by the parser.
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> There were no complains about the current parser, but that doesn't mean we
> should not improve!
>
> Two questions:
Looking through wicket examples in Wicket 7 branch, it looks like the ajax
debug bar is missing. I would hold up the release.
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are there any holdups for issuing new release
My bad, missed to import wicket-devutils in my workspace. No hold ups from
me.
Thanks Martijn!
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:43 PM, Pedro Santos wrote:
> Looking through wicket examples in Wicket 7 branch, it looks like the ajax
> debug bar is missing. I would hold up the r
essions like "bean.attributeAt.1" to the
methods: bean.getAttributeAt(1) and bean.setAttributeAt(1, value). This
resolution logic can be improved to only test for this kind of method
signatures if the analyzed input allows such usage (currently the resolver
always test for such signatures).
1 -
https://github.com/apache/wicket/commits/WICKET-4008-property-expression-parser
2 - http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/reflect/index.html
Cheers
Pedro Santos
Hi Sven, thx. Sending the response inline.
Cheers
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:08 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> very interesting work, thank you very much.
>
> I have a little nitpick though:
>
> The expression "addressList.1" is parsed
Yes, our resolver will resolve this expression to a list position as if it
was resolving an index expression, but only because it failed to find a
bean property
- the expression "regularList[0]" correctly parses "[0]" to an index and
will allow the resolver to skip any code
etype-resources/pom.xml;h=2afc43303ce865479144e2ec35b7efcf41c1450b;hp=07e39fd9955d1d673fbb66f5fa8110fcd4eacb09;hb=52f0b8af;hpb=6ec87eeba13500b89b6c81c757d8a946c68e8222
2 -
https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/mortbay/jetty/jetty-maven-plugin/
3 -
https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/eclipse/jetty/jetty-maven-plugin/
Ped
+1, thanks Martijn
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jonas wrote:
> [X] Yes, release Apache Wicket 7.5.0 (non-binding)
> [ ] No, don't release Apache Wicket 7.5.0, because ...
>
> Tested our main webapp - works fine.
>
> cheers,
> Jonas
>
>
>
[ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 8.0.0-M2
built locally and ran the examples
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 5:14 AM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> [ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 8.0.0-M2
>
> Tested local build + our main application
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Train
[ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 6.25.0
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> [ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 6.25.0
>
> Tested local build + ramdom examples
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
> https://twitter.com/mtgri
This is a vote to release Apache Wicket 1.5.17
[ ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 1.5.17
[ ] No, don't release Apache Wicket 1.5.17, because ...
Distributions, changelog, keys and signatures can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/wicket/1.5.17
Staging repository:
https://r
Hi,
I'm +1 to improve the fragment's markup identification [1] and Wicket's
property expression language [2] before promoting it.
1 - http://wicket-dev.markmail.org/thread/unwdqpxulw7tcd5l
2 - http://wicket-dev.markmail.org/thread/3g4zsqykid3ia6xl
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Oct 31, 2
[ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 1.5.17
We have 3 votes approving the release, the vote passes! Will complete the
release.
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> [ X ] Yes, release Apache Wicket 1.5.17
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training an
We can replace ClassMetaCache used in wicket-ioc's Injector by a Jandex[1]
class index.
1 - https://github.com/wildfly/jandex
Pedro Santos
On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> The main advantages of ByteBuddy are:
> - actively developed
> - Mockito
to write on the
DeferredFileOutputStream attribute.
Mitigation: Upgrade to Apache Wicket 6.25.0 or 1.5.17
Credit: This issue was discovered by Jacob Baines, Tenable Network Security and
Pedro Santos
References: https://wicket.apache.org/news
Thank you!
Feliz ano novo! (portuguese :)
Cheers
Pedro Santos
Pedro Santos
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Tobias Soloschenko
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wish you a merry christmas and happy new year. :-)
>
> kind reg
Hi Andrea,
Couldn't build using java 1.6 because of the Clirr plugin update.
Using java 1.7 it's all fine, I built the branch and tested some
random pages in wicket-examples.
If to build with 1.6 is not a requirement, +1
cheers
Pedro Santos
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Andre
and toolchains properly configured to find suitable jdk for 6.x and 7.x
branches. So in short, this build has actually been done with java 6.
Andrea.
On 02/01/2017 04:58, Pedro Santos wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> Couldn't build using java 1.6 because of the Clirr plugin update.
> Using jav
it. I can finish and merge the work
during the week.
1 - http://wicket-dev.markmail.org/thread/unwdqpxulw7tcd5l
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> @Sven: have you started migrating your app ?
>
> @Pedro: any idea when you will have time to
tp://wicket-dev.markmail.org/thread/unwdqpxulw7tcd5l
2 - http://markmail.org/message/yc2pwmbmasx5rzim
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Pedro Santos wrote:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Wicket-4201 IPag
han a strict syntax.
Sure, my point is let's make the it pluggable in a better place and
the default resolver to be a simpler syntax closer to the standard
JSR-341.
1 - http://wicket-dev.markmail.org/thread/unwdqpxulw7tcd5l
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Sven Meier wrote:
&g
date, it's
my purely my personal view that Wicket 8 is the right place for
proposed improvements.
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Pedro Santos wrote:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>
ugin, can someone help to fix the 6.x
build?
Cheers
1 -
https://ci.apache.org/builders/wicket-branch-6.x/builds/206/steps/compile/logs/stdio
2 -
https://ci.apache.org/builders/wicket-branch-6.x/builds/207/steps/compile/logs/stdio
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:23 AM, wrote:
> The
t.
Cheers
Pedro Santos
1 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4201
2 - https://github.com/apache/wicket/tree/WICKET-4201-improved-page-provider
+1 to release.
Built the branch locally and runned wicket-examples. Only I think your
public key used to sign the release is missing on Wicket's keys file
at http://archive.apache.org/dist/wicket/KEYS
Cheers
Pedro Santos
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Andrea Del Bene wrote:
> +1 to
Sure, working on it. Created WICKET-6318 to track the configurable
property resolver implementation.
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> Please create Pull Requests for your proposed changes!
> Thanks!
>
> Martin Grigorov
>
the branch
"WICKET-6318-configurable-property-expression-resolver" and I add more
detailed description of the changes at the ticket WICKET-6318
Cheers
Pedro Santos
1 -
https://github.com/apache/wicket/tree/WICKET-6318-configurable-property-expression-resolver
2 - https://issues.apach
since we aren't injecting managed beans
in JEE types
cheers
Pedro Santos
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Tobias Soloschenko <
tobiassolosche...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> kind regards
>
> Tobias
>
> > Am 25.03.2017 um 16:32 schrieb Andrea Del Bene :
>
OnlyModel the superinterface of IModel
instead of to keep it as an abstract adaptor for IModel? So we would have a
semantically correct functional interface.
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> Ugh, right!
>
> Then maybe just make IModel#setObjec
doesn't fit as a default implementation.
On Mar 27, 2017 3:22 AM, "Martin Grigorov" wrote:
Hi Pedro,
I am not sure I understand you!
This discussion was 1.5 years ago ...
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:39 AM, Pedro Santos wrote:
> -0
>
> I see no good reason for IModel t
out.
Indeed it looks a big change and I wouldn't propose it to Wicket 8, but
yes, I would like to give it a try in the future.
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Sven Meier wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> >Why don't we make AbstractReadyOnlyModel the superinterface of IModel
ren't extending
from IWrapModel, that would better communicates their purpose(fixed):
LambdaColumn, IModel, LambdaModel, AjaxEditableLabel, LambdaColumn
1 - https://github.com/pedrosans/wicket/tree/not-detachable
Pedro Santos
>The current solution - even if semantically wrong - is simpler.
It's simpler only because of the instanceof test that should be abstracted
from the user?
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
>
> for Wicket your changes look fine.
>
> B
t simply call
> detach and have it do nothing when nothing needs to be done?
If a logic inside the component depends on the model being detachable or
not, it wouldn't be able to determine it testing the current interface. No
specific usecase in mind.
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:53 P
> -1
is it a veto or a vote against the proposal?
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
> Fully agree with Emond!
> As a user I will hate such kind of change.
> Several years ago this change might be OKish, but now with Java 8 default
> meth
://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/e93eb0ae99c0c0257a151173951232
6ecf00cc73
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Francois Meillet <
francois.meil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Totally agree with Ernesto.
>
> François
>
>
>
> > Le 30 mars 2017 à 09:04, Ernesto Reina
to remove all those empty detach methods
and happily got ~25 less lines of bad code forced into the code base by
years of bad semantic.
1 - https://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/e93eb0ae99c0c0257a15
11739512326ecf00cc73
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro <
rei
ng it at the expense
of a wrong interface hierarchy for the rest of Wicket developers,
including new comers that shouldn't be having to understand a so tangled
and meaningless set of interfaces (IModel, as Sven pointed, isn't the only
semantically wrong interface, and there's even a t
it removes a superinteface, not adds one that could
not be substituted by its subtype. But the person who added the IDetachable
interface to IModel, did violate this principle, and the need of the
IIAmNotActuallyDetachabe interface to test if the model is actually
detachable is a clear indication of th
le 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
elFunction / IFunction extends from IModel{
default void setObject(final T object)
{
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("unsuported");
}
default void detach()
{
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("unsuported");
}
}
Cheers
Pedro Santos
od to getObject().
Sure, and it's our job to provide good a API allowing the user to benefit
from Java 8 features *where it does make sense*. A good set of constructors
for a Label would include:
public Label(String id, IReadyOnlyModel model){ ... }
Cheers
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Apr 10, 20
+1: yes you can use the Apache Wicket™ brand for the HyderabadJUG
good meetup Martijn
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently to abide by the rules of the ComDev [1] I have to ask
> permission to use the A
-COOKIE-and-Cookies-Disabled-in-Browser-td4679364.html#a4679370
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 6:17 AM, Emond Papegaaij wrote:
> -1
>
> I agree, application servers, such as WildFly provide similar solutions. By
> default WildFly will generate a self-signed certificate for
eloper can break the application in many
different
> ways...
>
> No quickstart, no problems :-)
Sure, but we can make non Wicket related problems more unlikely to happen
to
newcomers playing around. I thought this was the point of the proposal
Pedro Santos
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at
[x] Yes, release Apache Wicket 6.29.0
built with maven3 + java8 and runned wicket examples
Pedro Santos
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Sebastien Briquet
wrote:
> [x] Yes, release Apache Wicket 6.29.0
>
> Tested against Wicket jQuery UI (with java8 compiler)
>
+1
cheers
Pedro Santos
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Andrea Del Bene
wrote:
> +1 tested my main app
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2018, 4:46 AM Maxim Solodovnik
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Tested
> > 1) signatures
> > 2) build from sources
> > 3) our
+1
2011/9/4 jcgarciam
> +1
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Peter Ertl-3 [via Apache Wicket] <
> ml-node+3788932-1962192371-65...@n4.nabble.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Am 03.09.2011 um 22:49 schrieb Bruno Borges:
> >
> > > + 1
> > > On Sep 3, 2011 1:11 PM, "Ron Smits" <[hidden email]<
> http
+1
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos
2011/11/11 Andrea Del Bene :
> +1
>>
>> This vote is to release wicket 1.5.3
>>
>> Branch
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/branches/wicket-1.5.3
>>
>> Artifacts
>> http://people.apache.org/~ivaynberg/wicket-1.5.3/dist/
>>
>> Maven repo
>> https://r
Welcome Emond!
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos
2011/12/30 Peter Ertl
> Welcome aboard, Emond ! :-)
>
> Am 30.12.2011 um 20:42 schrieb Sven Meier:
>
> > Welcome :)
> >
> > Sven
> >
> > On 12/30/2011 04:26 PM, Emond Papegaaij wrote:
> >> Thank you all for the confidence you have in my work! I
would
value your input on the matter.
Cheers,
Pedro Santos
2012/5/29 Martin Grigorov
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Martijn Dashorst
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Martin Grigorov
> wrote:
> >>> - [...] should we provide a development mode integ
Hi Daniel,
if you want to call back a AJAX behaviour, you can also check the method
AbstractDefaultAjaxBehavior#getCallbackScript()
cheers,
Pedro Santos
2012/6/20 Martin Dilger
> Check the wiki to see what changed
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Wi
+1
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> +1
>
> -igor
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Martijn Dashorst
> wrote:
> > No fuzz, no separate RC releases. This is the real deal.
> >
> > Please vote for releasing
+1
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Bruno Borges wrote:
> +1
>
>
> *Bruno Borges*
> (11) 99564-9058
> *www.brunoborges.com*
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Igor Vaynberg >wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > -igor
> >
>
functionality. I think that a more consistent way of to honor such
flag is by improving AbstractBookmarkableMapper itself and not only one of
its extension (MountedMapper).
Let me know what you think so we can improve bookmarkable mapper.
Cheers,
Pedro Santos
Nice, I moved the logic to AbstractBookmarkableMapper in this branch:
sandbox/bookmarkable-callback-url
Let me know if the changes are ok before I start to update our test cases
expectations to assert the new encoded URL.
Cheers,
Pedro Santos
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Martin Grigorov
ket/commit/1ec0b8b3637feb19da4f87b485e96bfc7ce4e992
2 -
https://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/fba8bddd98da943ea74c9c04d90f17c75417c2fe
Cheers,
Pedro Santos
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> I've commented in the commit thread.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Pedro Santos wrote:
&g
test.
Pedro Santos
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:58 AM, wrote:
>
> > Updated Branches:
> > refs/heads/sandbox/bookmarkable-callback-url fba8bddd9 -> 1ec0b8b36
> >
> >
> > WICKET-4932: testing if t
Not sure, they are closely related to its outer class and their code next
to each other exposes their fundamental difference giving it readability.
It's your call.
Pedro Santos
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:28 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Pedro Santo
Hi, I'm requesting commit access to wicket stuff, to send an mbean view
component
my SourceForge user: pedrosans
-- Forwarded message --
From: Pedro Santos
Date: Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: Wicketstuff really needs some updates
To: us...@wicket.apache.org
Hi people,
I realize that I have sent to the wicket stuff, an project that depends on
some 1.6 java api. So I comment it on wicket-stuff-core pom, to let the
project compile...
But I really want to share the this project ( table ), so I wondering if
there are any chance of we have another agent, w
+1
I think that removing I from the interfaces names throw a good sign: "User,
Wicket team are releasing the best possible code naming, class design,
examples, and anything we think is optimal at that moment without any major
fireguard. Feel confident of to using our best."
- all documentation (p
Hi, I'm trying to visit parents components with an special interface like:
component.visitParents(IFeedback.class, new IVisitor)
and the methods signature is blocking me:
Component class code:
public final Object visitParents(final Class c,
final IVisitor visitor)
any special reason for
The Wicket Stuff core project has wicket 1.4.1 as dependence. Is it
deliberately?
--
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos
Hi, I have an similar case were I have done it. At the time I had an
textfield to receive an code that is case sensitive. So I create an
decorated model for the form component. In the case of a user write an code
were only characters are correct, the setObject method of component model
fix the char
Hi people, lately I'm having a few runtime problems on my wicket projects,
and I'm searching for an clean solution. So let me share it with you, and
know seconds options:
Environment: some components that I create for wicket projects on my company
has lazy model creation. Means that those componen
2 - here I have an simple consideration: framework should respect my
> component design.
>
>My view is different: we should respect the framework design. Don't fight
>your tools, learn how to use them properly.
I agree. Let me say it in a different way:
framework should allow an simple component
I know it is an minor thing, but the creation act that the new keyword
exposes, the 'of' method don't has. IMO the simple fact of an method name
does not contain an verb is an anti-pattern.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:50 PM, nino martinez wael <
nino.martinez.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> im +1, unless
Hi, Wicket has the style session attribute. Why the resources reference has
this attribute too?
Currently I can need code like:
resourceReference.setStyle(Session.get().getStyle());
response.renderReference(resourceReference);
I see it as unnecessary. IMO ResourceReference can lose this attribute
Why do Wicket call abort method on XMLHttpRequest after process it?
(wicket-ajax.js line 1001) It doesn't cause any damage, just the response
get the error flag set to true.
http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/#the-abort-method
--
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos
The actual wicket ajax implementation use a pool of XmlHttpRequest objects.
So, after an request is made, wicket call his abort method to get his
readyState back to 0, and use this object again. Other frameworks like
jQuery have an pluggable factory method to create XmlHttpRequest objects.
The defa
2010 at 1:35 PM, Pedro Santos wrote:
> The actual wicket ajax implementation use a pool of XmlHttpRequest objects.
> So, after an request is made, wicket call his abort method to get his
> readyState back to 0, and use this object again. Other frameworks like
> jQuery have an pluggab
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Pedro Santos
> wrote:
>
> > Actually everything in javascript is pluggable, just the call to abort
> > method from XmlHttpRequest you can't avoid.
> > Ex.:
> >
> > Wicket.Ajax.getTransport = function(){
> &g
I'm geting the mesagem: "Resource interpreted as image but transferred with
MIME type text/plain."
on google chrome when Wicket returns with the state not modified for
requests to resources with 'If-Modified-Since' parameter.
There is any need to wicket filter - the guy who is creating the response
Why do onClick method from Link is public? Who would want or need to call it
from outside?
--
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos
>From an instance of what class, other than Link and it subclasses?
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Erik van Oosten wrote:
> Perhaps the Wicket framework needs some way to call it ;)
>
> Regards,
> Erik.
>
>
>
> Pedro Santos wrote:
>
>> Why do onClick m
Hi Martin, thanks for the reply!
> Hi, the form component clearInput method that clean this state is called
> on
> > the valid method. I'm trying to guess why the form component keep his raw
> > input after an form processing with errors. I can't figure out why don't
> > clear the raw input in th
Hi, the form component clearInput method that clean this state is called on
the valid method. I'm trying to guess why the form component keep his raw
input after an form processing with errors. I can't figure out why don't
clear the raw input in this situation, since on the next form submit the ra
IMO the form processing can be:
>
> 1. validate
> 2. detect error
> 3. keep rawinput
> 4. re-render error components with red border AND rawinput
>
4.1. throw away the raw input in some detach method
5. user retry form submit
>
6. all form components get they raw input again since they get rend
om> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> What's the difference whether it's thrown away or not if the next step
> is re-submit with new values?
>
> **
> Martin
>
> 2010/2/22 Pedro Santos :
> > IMO the form processing can be:
> >
> >>
> >> 1. va
ct();
>
> **
> Martin
>
> 2010/2/23 Pedro Santos :
> > Hi Martin, consider this form:
> >
> > java code:
> >Form form = new Form("form");
> >add(form);
> >final TextField textField = new TextField("tf",
gt;}
>
>protected void internalOnModelChanged()
>{
>// If the model for this form component changed, we should
> make it
>// valid again because there can't be any invalid input for
> it anymore.
> valid();
>
Hi Johan, actually it is 2 overridable protected methods that can execute an
rule already implemented by some custom component.
I attached an test to via Jira site showing the possible problem.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2960
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 5:38 AM, Johan Compagner wrot
age org.apache.wicket!!!
> But that is something i definitely dont see as a problem because you
> shouldnt do that.
> org.apache.wicket is the package of wicket itself (just like java.lang
> is of java itself)
>
> johan
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 14:02, Pedro Santos wrote:
Hi Jeremy, I think it would be interesting close the
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2969 before push the release
1.4.10
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
wrote:
> Does everyone have everything they want in for 1.4.10? I think we should
> push a release soon if we're
-1, comments on the ticket
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:12 AM, nino martinez wael <
nino.martinez.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I want change my vote to -1 until this is fixed :
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-3142
>
> 2010/10/29 Martin Grigorov
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at
I'm just concerned about the side effects. A bug on the component data index
can cause URL issues. For instance an URL generated for one behavior
invoking another behavior on the same component. Then we will have
developers evaluating the milestone and returning different problems than
the one repo
n Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Pedro Santos
> wrote:
>
> > I'm just concerned about the side effects. A bug on the component data
> > index
> > can cause URL issues. For instance an URL generated for one behavior
> > invoking another behavior on the same compon
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
