> wicket-scriptaculous, wicket-prototype, wicket-dojo, wicket-foo which is a > huge maintenance headache for us, and probably not the way to go. > > if anyone has any better solutions im all ears. the problem is that the > components are encapsulated, so you can never count on any of them to > include the full version of any lib they depend on. and today unfortunately > these libs are so big that they come with multiple files - and on top of > that have all these dynamic loaders.
I agree I'm not looking forward to maintaining even more libs either. Though the end of the day that might still be a better solution than having duplicate inclusions... Eelco --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
