Thank you JT, the day I was working on this when I checked the maven
repository, the first search result returns the older versions of
wicket-extensions based off the groupid = wicket. It was my mistake, I
didn't realize at the time there was a newer branch based off groupid =
org.apache.wicket,
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:46 PM, gnugrf gnu...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
ok, I had read that in a post from several years ago, it just didnt make
sense to me, because I thought alive and well would mean that is has some
ability to work with a more current version of wicket. a bit misleading
ok, I had read that in a post from several years ago, it just didnt make
sense to me, because I thought alive and well would mean that is has some
ability to work with a more current version of wicket. a bit misleading
first response.
--
View this message in context:
extensions is alive and well, use it every day.
-igor
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:34 PM, gnugrf gnu...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
I had added wicket-extensions to my pom.xml, because I was planning on making
use of DataTable and DefaultDataTable, however, I hadn't yet added any code
that would
That's not a wicket class. You're missing commons-collections.jar
On Aug 13, 2010 4:34 PM, gnugrf gnu...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
I had added wicket-extensions to my pom.xml, because I was planning on
making
use of DataTable and DefaultDataTable, however, I hadn't yet added any
code
that
Yeah I noticed that when I checked the maven repo that it required
commons-collections, so I tried adding version 3.2.1. I ended up with the
following error:
java.lang.ClassCastException: wicket.extensions.Initializer cannot be cast
to org.apache.wicket.IInitializer
The maven repo stated that
extensions version should be the same as wicket, so unless you are
using wicket-1.2.7 you are using the wrong version.
-igor
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:09 PM, gnugrf gnu...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
Yeah I noticed that when I checked the maven repo that it required
commons-collections, so I
