Re: page version and forms

2012-08-28 Thread Alex Shubert
Nope, 1.5

Well, I am not quite sure that my statement is correct.  while tree
project has some kind of examples, there are no real documentation.
Let's consieder
http://www.mysticcoders.com/blog/autocomplete-with-an-object/  - my
opinion is that sometimes one may want to make an impression quickly
looking through a short how-to instead of downloading code, trying to
assemble it (btw, your instruction doesn't work) and digging through
the code. It works most of the time if time is not a question.

On 22 August 2012 11:24, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 Are you using wicket-tree or the new components in Wicket 6?

 Please be more specific what information you're looking for. I'll gladly 
 provide more info in javadoc or in the wiki.

 Sven

 Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com schrieb:

Sven while you are here:
why no documentation for Tree? Nothing at all? Right now I face a
problem - tree do not persist it's state (Bookmarcable links, copied
from example) and I have no clue where to see.


On 21 August 2012 21:38, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 And the winner is ... Martin!

 On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

 Sven


 On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin,

 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.


 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
  visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
  @Override
  public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
  if (!component.isStateless()) {
  LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
  + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
  + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

  // iVisit.stop(component);
  }
  }
  });
  }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

  dependency
  groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
  artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
  version${wicket.version}/version
  /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states
 that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
 wrote:

 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert
 alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello

 Recently I found 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-28 Thread Martin Grigorov
Alex,

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Nope, 1.5

 Well, I am not quite sure that my statement is correct.  while tree
 project has some kind of examples, there are no real documentation.
 Let's consieder
 http://www.mysticcoders.com/blog/autocomplete-with-an-object/  - my
 opinion is that sometimes one may want to make an impression quickly
 looking through a short how-to instead of downloading code, trying to

This article is provided by a Wicket user.
Be a good user and write an article about something that you understand.

 assemble it (btw, your instruction doesn't work) and digging through
 the code. It works most of the time if time is not a question.

Don't hesitate to send us patches for the javadoc. Or a whole article
that we can put at http://wicket.apache.org/learn/projects/.


 On 22 August 2012 11:24, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 Are you using wicket-tree or the new components in Wicket 6?

 Please be more specific what information you're looking for. I'll gladly 
 provide more info in javadoc or in the wiki.

 Sven

 Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com schrieb:

Sven while you are here:
why no documentation for Tree? Nothing at all? Right now I face a
problem - tree do not persist it's state (Bookmarcable links, copied
from example) and I have no clue where to see.


On 21 August 2012 21:38, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 And the winner is ... Martin!

 On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

 Sven


 On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin,

 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.


 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
  visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
  @Override
  public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
  if (!component.isStateless()) {
  LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
  + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
  + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

  // iVisit.stop(component);
  }
  }
  });
  }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

  dependency
  groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
  artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
  version${wicket.version}/version
  /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-22 Thread Alex Shubert
Sven while you are here:
why no documentation for Tree? Nothing at all? Right now I face a
problem - tree do not persist it's state (Bookmarcable links, copied
from example) and I have no clue where to see.


On 21 August 2012 21:38, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 And the winner is ... Martin!

 On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

 Sven


 On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin,

 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.


 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
  visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
  @Override
  public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
  if (!component.isStateless()) {
  LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
  + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
  + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

  // iVisit.stop(component);
  }
  }
  });
  }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

  dependency
  groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
  artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
  version${wicket.version}/version
  /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states
 that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
 wrote:

 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert
 alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

   and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page
 contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version
 number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com


 -
 To unsubscribe, 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-22 Thread Martin Grigorov
Hi,

These components have been merged in Wicket 6.
You can see the demo at
http://www.wicket-library.com/wicket-examples-6.0.x/tree
and the code in org.apache.wicket.extensions.markup.html.repeater.tree
package in wicket-extensions module.
The javadocs are also improved.

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Sven while you are here:
 why no documentation for Tree? Nothing at all? Right now I face a
 problem - tree do not persist it's state (Bookmarcable links, copied
 from example) and I have no clue where to see.


 On 21 August 2012 21:38, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 And the winner is ... Martin!

 On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

 Sven


 On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin,

 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.


 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
  visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
  @Override
  public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
  if (!component.isStateless()) {
  LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
  + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
  + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

  // iVisit.stop(component);
  }
  }
  });
  }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

  dependency
  groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
  artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
  version${wicket.version}/version
  /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states
 that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
 wrote:

 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert
 alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

   and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page
 contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version
 number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr


 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-22 Thread Sven Meier
Are you using wicket-tree or the new components in Wicket 6?

Please be more specific what information you're looking for. I'll gladly 
provide more info in javadoc or in the wiki.

Sven

Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com schrieb:

Sven while you are here:
why no documentation for Tree? Nothing at all? Right now I face a
problem - tree do not persist it's state (Bookmarcable links, copied
from example) and I have no clue where to see.


On 21 August 2012 21:38, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
 And the winner is ... Martin!

 On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

 Sven


 On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin,

 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.


 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
  visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
  @Override
  public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
  if (!component.isStateless()) {
  LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
  + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
  + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

  // iVisit.stop(component);
  }
  }
  });
  }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

  dependency
  groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
  artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
  version${wicket.version}/version
  /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states
 that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org
 wrote:

 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert
 alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

   and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page
 contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version
 number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Martin Grigorov
Use StatelessForm instead.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Alex Shubert
They are using
FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
must be the case.


On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Best regards
Alexandr

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Martin Grigorov
The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Alex Shubert
Martin
with all my respect but their build script uses

dependency
groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
version${wicket.version}/version
/dependency

${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

So,
1. no stateless form
2. it is 1.5
3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
can't be compiled under 1.4

Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
url on every tree node selection?
thanks


On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Best regards
Alexandr

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Martin Grigorov
Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
more details.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Alex Shubert
Martin,
http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
'?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take
a look at event listener implementation.

About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
renders version number eager to appear.
The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...


If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
the solution:
if (!isPageStateless()) {
visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
Component() {
@Override
public void component(Component component,
IVisitComponent iVisit) {
if (!component.isStateless()) {
LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
+ component.getClass().getName() +  : 
+ component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

// iVisit.stop(component);
}
}
});
}

If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
instantiate pages with WicketTester.


On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Pointbreak
The tree node selections are fully handled by ajax requests, so they
will (obviously) never change the url of the page. Change the selection
of e.g. the dropdown for Content, and you will see that the url
changes.

There are ways to have forms without version/id information in the URL.
Search this list for e.g. NoVersionMount. Such solutions do change how
Wicket behaves with the back-button/page-refresh, since a new version of
the page will always be returned in that case.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012, at 13:16, Alex Shubert wrote:
 [...]
 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks
 [...]
 
 
 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
  The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.
 
  http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::
 
  On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  They are using
  FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);
 
  and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
  Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
  must be the case.
 
 
  On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
  Use StatelessForm instead.
 
  On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  Hello
 
  Recently I found wicket tree control
 
  http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested
 
   and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
  Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
  in a url.
  How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
  containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
  black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )
 
 
 
 
  --
  Best regards
  Alexandr
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Martin Grigorov
  jWeekend
  Training, Consulting, Development
  http://jWeekend.com
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Best regards
  Alexandr
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Martin Grigorov
  jWeekend
  Training, Consulting, Development
  http://jWeekend.com
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Best regards
 Alexandr
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Alex Shubert
It's obvious that selection of leafs (implemented as
BookmarcableLinks) is NOT handled by Ajax.

BookmarkableFolderContent.java : 62

PageParameters parameters = new 
PageParameters();
parameters.add(foo, foo.getId());

return new 
BookmarkablePageLinkVoid(id, tree.getPage()
.getClass(), 
parameters);

Or you can take a look at FB console and see network activity.



On 21 August 2012 16:48, Pointbreak pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
 The tree node selections are fully handled by ajax requests, so they
 will (obviously) never change the url of the page. Change the selection
 of e.g. the dropdown for Content, and you will see that the url
 changes.

 There are ways to have forms without version/id information in the URL.
 Search this list for e.g. NoVersionMount. Such solutions do change how
 Wicket behaves with the back-button/page-refresh, since a new version of
 the page will always be returned in that case.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012, at 13:16, Alex Shubert wrote:
 [...]
 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks
 [...]


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
  The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.
 
  http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::
 
  On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  They are using
  FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);
 
  and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
  Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
  must be the case.
 
 
  On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
  Use StatelessForm instead.
 
  On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  Hello
 
  Recently I found wicket tree control
 
  http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested
 
   and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
  Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
  in a url.
  How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
  containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
  black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )
 
 
 
 
  --
  Best regards
  Alexandr
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Martin Grigorov
  jWeekend
  Training, Consulting, Development
  http://jWeekend.com
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Best regards
  Alexandr
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 
 
 
 
  --
  Martin Grigorov
  jWeekend
  Training, Consulting, Development
  http://jWeekend.com
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
 



 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




-- 
Best regards
Alexandr

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Martin Grigorov
The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5 version.
I can bet on this.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin,
 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

Most of them are actually still valid.
There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.



 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
 visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
 @Override
 public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
 if (!component.isStateless()) {
 LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
 + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
 + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

 // iVisit.stop(component);
 }
 }
 });
 }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Alex Shubert
Martin,
does it really makes any difference? Lack of stateless navigation does
( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1086 )
Anyway, I explained solution in my prev letter. Thanks!

On 21 August 2012 16:59, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5 
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin,
 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.



 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
 visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
 @Override
 public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
 if (!component.isStateless()) {
 LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
 + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
 + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

 // iVisit.stop(component);
 }
 }
 });
 }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Martin Grigorov
 jWeekend
 Training, Consulting, Development
 http://jWeekend.com

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Martin Grigorov
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin,
 does it really makes any difference? Lack of stateless navigation does
 ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1086 )

I'm not sure what you mean by referring to this ticket. I guess you
just found out that your page is stateful because you use
PagingNavigator. I believe it is quite easy to make a stateless
version of the navigator.

Maybe the topic of Wicket 7 should be Stateless.

 Anyway, I explained solution in my prev letter. Thanks!

 On 21 August 2012 16:59, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5 
 version.
 I can bet on this.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:
 Martin,
 http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
 Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
 '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

 Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
 wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
 it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.

 a look at event listener implementation.

 About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
 is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
 renders version number eager to appear.
 The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
 hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

 Most of them are actually still valid.
 There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
 to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.



 If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
 the solution:

 There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.

 if (!isPageStateless()) {
 visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
 Component() {
 @Override
 public void component(Component component,
 IVisitComponent iVisit) {
 if (!component.isStateless()) {
 LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
 + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
 + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

 // iVisit.stop(component);
 }
 }
 });
 }

 If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
 instantiate pages with WicketTester.


 On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
 url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

 I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
 more details.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Martin
 with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

 ${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
 wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

 So,
 1. no stateless form
 2. it is 1.5
 3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
 http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
 can't be compiled under 1.4

 Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
 time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
 url on every tree node selection?
 thanks


 On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 They are using
 FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

 and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
 Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
 must be the case.


 On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
 Use StatelessForm instead.

 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hello

 Recently I found wicket tree control

 http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
 Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
 in a url.
 How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
 containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
 black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




 --
 Best regards
 Alexandr

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




 --

Re: page version and forms

2012-08-21 Thread Sven Meier

And the winner is ... Martin!

On AppEngine I still have Wicket 1.4.x running.

Sven

On 08/21/2012 02:59 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

The Google Code repo contains 1.5 but the deployed app is using pre-1.5 version.
I can bet on this.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

Martin,
http://wicket-tree.googlecode.com/svn/repo/wicket-tree/wicket-tree-parent/0.5.0/wicket-tree-parent-0.5.0.pom
Again, no 1.4 at all. Not in one place. Moreover,
'?wicket:interface=:0:1:::'  doesn't means 1.4 is in action. Just take

Is there a reason why you don't trust me ? :-)
wicket:interface is no more used in 1.5+, unless the application adds
it explicitly. Wicket (the framework) doesn't use it anymore.


a look at event listener implementation.

About the problem: the page I gave link for is really stateless but it
is not meant to be, it just happened. If user choose any other tree
renders version number eager to appear.
The most Wicket problem right now is it's occult state. Wiki is
hopelessly outdated, most of the examples refer to 1.2.-1.3 version...

Most of them are actually still valid.
There are new pages labeled with wicket15 and wicket6 which refer
to the new features in 1.5 and 6.0 respect.



If someone wonder how to determine why his page is stateful here is
the solution:

There is StatelessChecker in wicket-devutils for this task.


if (!isPageStateless()) {
 visitChildren(Component.class, new IVisitorComponent,
Component() {
 @Override
 public void component(Component component,
IVisitComponent iVisit) {
 if (!component.isStateless()) {
 LOGGER.info(Stateful component found [ 
 + component.getClass().getName() +  : 
 + component.getMarkupId() +  ]);

 // iVisit.stop(component);
 }
 }
 });
 }

If in need of test detection, extract visitor to separate class and
instantiate pages with WicketTester.


On 21 August 2012 15:47, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

Sorry for being stubborn but having '?wicket:interface=:0:1:::' in the
url means that this is Wicket pre-1.5 ;-)

I guess Sven will join this conversation later today and explain in
more details.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

Martin
with all my respect but their build script uses

 dependency
 groupIdorg.apache.wicket/groupId
 artifactIdwicket-core/artifactId
 version${wicket.version}/version
 /dependency

${wicket.version} derived from parent pom where
wicket.version1.5.0/wicket.version

So,
1. no stateless form
2. it is 1.5
3. it's pretty easy to ensure yourself just by looking into code
http://code.google.com/p/wicket-tree/wiki/RunningExamples It even
can't be compiled under 1.4

Anyway: what does your answer has to do with my question? One more
time: how that example manage not to increase page version shown in
url on every tree node selection?
thanks


On 21 August 2012 14:39, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

The deployed examples use Wicket 1.4.

http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/?wicket:interface=:0:1:::

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

They are using
FormVoid form = new FormVoid(form);

and still no version in url on round-trips. Also, FilterForm from
Wicket API doesn't extends StatelessForm while your answer states that
must be the case.


On 21 August 2012 14:20, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:

Use StatelessForm instead.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Alex Shubert alex.shub...@gmail.com wrote:

Hello

Recently I found wicket tree control

http://wicket-tree.appspot.com/nested

  and one there is a thing I can't understand: while the page contains
Form it looks like not versioned. I mean there are no version number
in a url.
How does it work then? Is there any clear way to build pages
containing Form without explicit version number in url except some
black magic involved ( modified MountedMapper )




--
Best regards
Alexandr

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




--
Best regards
Alexandr

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training,