Eelco, Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful reply. Perhaps there are things that can be done in the framework with cookies and such.
I am going to be looking to additions to wicket. I need to get the source built and working in my local environment. -Doug Eelco Hillenius wrote: > > >> Another approach is to provide a more graceful session-expiration >> strategy. >> In many cases, you could redisplay the original page (perhaps there are >> cases where the no-arg constructor would work). > > A much better way of solving your problems is to work with plenty of > bookmarkable pages AND use cookies to recognize that you could pick up > a session again, and you could even for instance save the last page or > pages a user visited in the last visited etc (I'm sure Amazon does > something like that). You'll just have to plan carefully for it, and > depend more on your own brainpower than to expect everything to come > from the framework. > >> Finally, there are likely cases where parts of a page could be stateful >> and >> others stateless. In my case, even though I display a login form via >> Ajax, >> it still should be possible to submit it in a stateless format. >> >> Let me end by saying that I am a big believer in the framework. >> However, I >> feel the session expiration issue is a stumbling block. I welcome >> others >> perspectives on this. > > The problem that Wicket tries to solve is quite hard*, and > consequently the framework has gotten quite complex. The more we > facilitate corner cases and try to be a framework that fits all > imaginable problems, the harder the framework will be too maintain, > and - due to having more options to cover - the harder it may be to > use. > > We've taken some serious looks at how to come up with a hybrid model > and push Wicket into supporting even more stateless use cases, but so > far these efforts stranded because the solutions we came up with were > very hackish and would probably open up a big fat can of worms we > wouldn't be able to support properly. Maybe we can improve things here > and there (we're all for that!), but it is really important that > people come up with intelligent solutions (patches would be great) > rather than just stating shortcomings. > > Cheers, > > Eelco > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiket-2.0-time-frame-tp16992791p17034406.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
