Hi,
Is there a JIRA issue tracking this render wrong page based on page
version problem? I'm very interested in this issue since sharing links
to stateful pages containing a page version is essentially broken.
Regards,
Bertrand
On 20/03/2012 12:45 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20,
Hi Bertrand,
Did you verify that ? If yes and you have a quickstart then create a ticket.
There are no tickets from this discussion so far.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet
ber...@step.polymtl.ca wrote:
Hi,
Is there a JIRA issue tracking this render wrong page based on
I reproduced the issue in the quickstart attached to WICKET-4488.
On 04/04/2012 3:44 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
Hi Bertrand,
Did you verify that ? If yes and you have a quickstart then create a ticket.
There are no tickets from this discussion so far.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Bertrand
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Paolo irresistible...@gmail.com wrote:
Alle giovedì 22 marzo 2012, Pointbreak ha scritto:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
No that is not what happens with NoVersionMount:
i didnt say it was an ajax twistie
Not being an
Alle martedì 27 marzo 2012, Martin Grigorov ha scritto:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Paolo irresistible...@gmail.com wrote:
Alle giovedì 22 marzo 2012, Pointbreak ha scritto:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
No that is not what happens with NoVersionMount:
Martin wrote:
HomePageMapper is explicitly registered in SystemMapper (the default
compound root mapper). The resource mapper example in
wicket-examples also mounts custom home mapper.
Thanks Martin. I managed to get something working based on
this. Here's a gist, in case anyone else is
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:53 PM, armhold armh...@gmail.com wrote:
Martin wrote:
HomePageMapper is explicitly registered in SystemMapper (the default
compound root mapper). The resource mapper example in
wicket-examples also mounts custom home mapper.
Thanks Martin. I managed to get
I'm really grateful for this conversation, as I've been wondering the
same question for a while now.
Martin writes:
So far I didn't hear a good explanation why the page id causes you
troubles. Most of you are saying it is ugly.
Well it is kind of ugly. It is far less ugly than the 1.4-style
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:08 PM, armhold armh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm really grateful for this conversation, as I've been wondering the
same question for a while now.
Martin writes:
So far I didn't hear a good explanation why the page id causes you
troubles. Most of you are saying it is
Alle giovedì 22 marzo 2012, Pointbreak ha scritto:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
No that is not what happens with NoVersionMount:
i didnt say it was an ajax twistie
Not being an ajax twistie link still doesn't add the ?1 to the url.
NoVersionMount
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012, at 20:00, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i think there is some confusion here. wicket 1.4 had page ids. it also
had page versions. in 1.5 we simply merged page id and page version
into the same variable - page id. this made things much simpler and
also allowed some usecases that
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012, at 20:00, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i think there is some confusion here. wicket 1.4 had page ids. it also
had page versions. in 1.5 we simply merged page id and page version
into the same
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012, at 20:00, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i think there is some confusion here. wicket 1.4 had page ids. it also
had page versions. in 1.5 we simply merged page id and page version
into the same variable - page id. this made things much simpler and
also allowed some usecases that
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 08:23, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012, at 20:00, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i think there is some confusion here. wicket 1.4 had page ids. it also
had page versions. in 1.5 we
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 08:23, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012, at 20:00, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i think there is some
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 09:49, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 08:23, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 09:49, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 08:23, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012
I am not sure if this is related, but I noticed that occasionally when
I click on a link and expect page FOO to render I actually get
redirected to a completely unrelated page BAR. This happens when I
have a different tab that has page BAR open.
I am using Wicket 1.4.17.
Regards,
Alec
On Thu,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:56, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 09:49, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:56, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 09:49, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:56, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:56, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:05, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:05, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:30, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:05, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:30, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:05, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:30, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:05, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 14:34, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 12:30, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar
No this is bad, i agree with Igor, the latest page should be refreshed, not
reset!
By the way, the hybrid in 1.4 what we are using does look at the mount if
the page doesn't exists any more. And we depend on that, am i reading it
right that we lost that in 1.5?
On Mar 22, 2012 11:12 PM,
What's the point in refreshing if it returns exactly the same page as
before ?
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.comwrote:
No this is bad, i agree with Igor, the latest page should be refreshed, not
reset!
By the way, the hybrid in 1.4 what we are using
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM, heikki tropic...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the point in refreshing if it returns exactly the same page as
before ?
it allows components such as datatables and others that pull data from
the database to refresh, while preserving other things.
think of it this way:
i dont think we lost it. something in my app here made it work weird,
but i couldnt repro in a quickstart.
-igor
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com wrote:
No this is bad, i agree with Igor, the latest page should be refreshed, not
reset!
By the way, the
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 15:46, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM, heikki tropic...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the point in refreshing if it returns exactly the same page as
before ?
it allows components such as datatables and others that pull data from
the database to
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:42, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:56, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
indeed. we should check that the page pointed to by the id maps back
to the mount, and create a new instance based on the mount if it
doesnt. jira please.
This is already the case, no need of a ticket for this. If
Yes (sort of) except you don't need two users. Just bookmark a page with
a version/id e.g. ?5, close the sessions, open a new session, do some
interaction so that another version of the page with version/id ?5
exists, and use that bookmark. Stuff like that confuses users even if
they don't care
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
Yes (sort of) except you don't need two users. Just bookmark a page with
a version/id e.g. ?5, close the sessions, open a new session, do some
interaction so that another version of the page with version/id ?5
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 10:40, Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
Yes (sort of) except you don't need two users. Just bookmark a page with
a version/id e.g. ?5, close the sessions, open a new session, do some
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 10:40, Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
Yes (sort of) except you don't need two users. Just bookmark a page with
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 10:50, Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012, at 10:40, Martin Grigorov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
Yes (sort
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
indeed. we should check that the page pointed to by the id maps back
to the mount, and create a new instance based on the mount if it
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
indeed. we should check that the page pointed to by the id
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Igor Vaynberg
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Martin Grigorov
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Igor Vaynberg
Hi,
So far I didn't hear a good explanation why the page id causes you
troubles. Most of you are saying it is ugly. In my previous company
we asked some of our users about
wicket:interface=0:1:Something:else:9 and most of them said I don't
care, I haven't noticed it, etc... And we did this just
On 2012-03-19 02:46, Paolo wrote:
I support you! I implemented class NoVersionMount thanks to pointbreak
in my MainApplication. And It will be my template for future app. But
to do it, I needed to understood the problem, check on google, read a
lot of pages, without found a solution, so post
It's a problem when users bookmark it. Because ...?5 this session is an
entirely other page as ...?5 in another session tomorrow.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012, at 11:53, Girts Ziemelis wrote:
On 2012-03-19 02:46, Paolo wrote:
I support you! I implemented class NoVersionMount thanks to pointbreak
indeed. we should check that the page pointed to by the id maps back
to the mount, and create a new instance based on the mount if it
doesnt. jira please.
-igor
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
It's a problem when users bookmark it. Because ...?5
I've been thinking about the new 1.5 page ID/versioning feature (which
we disabled as soon as we discovered it) and wondering if there is
actually a real world scenario for stateful pages that actually requires
this functionality.
I understand the purpose is so that the browser's 'Back' function
Alle lunedì 19 marzo 2012, Chris Colman ha scritto:
I've been thinking about the new 1.5 page ID/versioning feature (which
we disabled as soon as we discovered it) and wondering if there is
actually a real world scenario for stateful pages that actually requires
this functionality.
I
-Original Message-
From: Paolo [mailto:irresistible...@gmail.com]
Thoughts?
I support you!
I implemented class NoVersionMount thanks to pointbreak in my
MainApplication.
And It will be my template for future app.
But to do it, I needed to understood the problem, check on google, read
a
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Chris Colman
chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com wrote:
I've been thinking about the new 1.5 page ID/versioning feature (which
we disabled as soon as we discovered it) and wondering if there is
actually a real world scenario for stateful pages that actually requires
53 matches
Mail list logo
