Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-28 Thread Edward Zarecor
If it's of any use, I put together a very, very simple 2D Quickstart for my own edification. I've deployed, exercised and un-deployed builds of application using Wicket 1.4.8 and 1.4.9 to Weblogic 10. In the former case I do not see, via YourKit, the Java2D Disposer thread holding a reference to

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-28 Thread Alex Objelean
I had the same results with tomcat 6... We could try to see what happens with other web servers with combination of different jdk versions. Until now, there was no prove of the memory leak. -- View this message in context:

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-28 Thread James Carman
As I said when I determined the same thing (I attached a quickstart to the JIRA issue), the fact that it doesn't leak isn't really the biggest negative, IMHO. The fact that it doesn't work for the desired usecase (thread pools) is a huge negative and a reason it should be backed out (which it has

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-28 Thread Alex Objelean
I'm not insisting on bringing it back, but I don't understand on what is based your conclusion that it doesn't work for the desired use-case (thread pools) ? Alex -- View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/announce-Release-Wicket-1-4-9-tp2228179p2235138.html

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-28 Thread James Carman
The ITL's value is copied when a thread is created, so it will either: a. Never get copied to the pooled threads. b. Get copied one time into the pooled threads (the pooled thread is started during a request thread for some reason). If there are multiple Wicket applications running in the same

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-25 Thread Sven Meier
Sorry, what was the use case after all? Sven -- View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/announce-Release-Wicket-1-4-9-tp2228179p2229772.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-25 Thread James Carman
It is *not* a theoretical objection. Please see: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6489540 This is a real problem that Sun (now Oracle I guess) has identified and is working on. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Alex Objelean alex.objel...@gmail.com wrote: I don't want to

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-25 Thread Alex Objelean
Hi Sven! See the task description details: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2846 Alex -- View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/announce-Release-Wicket-1-4-9-tp2228179p2229836.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Michał Letyński
Hi. W dniu 2010-05-24 03:59, Jeremy Thomerson pisze: ** Improvement * [WICKET-2790] - wicketTester.executeAjaxEvent method does not check if form is multiPart Is this improvment a part of 1.4.9 ? Since on jira page this improvment is postponed to 1.4.10.

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
2010/5/24 Michał Letyński mletyn...@consol.pl Hi. W dniu 2010-05-24 03:59, Jeremy Thomerson pisze: ** Improvement * [WICKET-2790] - wicketTester.executeAjaxEvent method does not check if form is multiPart Is this improvment a part of 1.4.9 ? Since on jira page this improvment is

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Alex Objelean
Hi Jeremy! Thanks for the effort put in this release. Though there is a lot of discussion around WICKET-2846, instead of deciding to revert it in the next release, I would rather suggest to take the chance for those who voted for reverting it to prove that it is indeed the issue. I am still

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Alex Objelean alex.objel...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Jeremy! Thanks for the effort put in this release. Though there is a lot of discussion around WICKET-2846, instead of deciding to revert it in the next release, I would rather suggest to take the chance for those

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Alex Objelean
When comparing a small feature (but still feature) proven by an use case (limited but still an use case) and a NON problem proven only with theoretical presumption (with also very limited use case), would you still choose reverting it? Same question for all who voted against it... Alex -- View

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Martijn Dashorst
I find the argument: a thread started outside the control of the programmer by the JRE or a library to do some processing (e.g. rendering an image), which inherits Wicket's thread local, causing a leak of our thread locals rather convincing. The result would be redeploy problems, ultimately

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Alex Objelean
I don't want to insist to much, I'm not absurd, but we are technical people. Don't you think that any theorem should be proven? The least we can achieve is to learn a new thing about how ITL are related to memory leaks. I know it isn't easy to prove, but aren't there enough tools to help us? Is

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-24 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Alex Objelean alex.objel...@gmail.comwrote: I don't want to insist to much, I'm not absurd, but we are technical people. Don't you think that any theorem should be proven? The least we can achieve is to learn a new thing about how ITL are related to memory

[announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-23 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
Wicket 1.4.9 is released! This is the ninth maintenance release of the 1.4.x series and brings over fifteen bug fixes and improvements. Tag: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/releases/wicket-1.4.9/ Changelog:

Re: [announce] Release Wicket 1.4.9

2010-05-23 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
Note that there seems to be some delay on some mirrors (including the maven repos). I'm working out the details now, but most of the mirrors (excluding maven) have the artifacts available. In the meantime, if you really need 1.4.9, you could use the maven repo that was sent in the vote message