Yes, that is what I ment. I should have said "wicketstuff-annotation" and "wicketstuff-automount".
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Carman Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 5:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [announce] wicketstuff-annotation 1.0 released On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Hoover, William <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Would it be better if there were a core wicket-annotation project > that > provides the basics (such as the scanner) and another project > called > wicket-automount (with wicket-annotation dependency)? That > way other > "future" projects can utilize the core capabilities > without reinventing > the wheel. This would also accommodate those > who want a specific > dependency for wicket-automount. > > The project can be split without needing to make one a core project > though. On the long term we could consider making something like that > a core project, but for now that simply wouldn't be practical. The > great thing about wicket-stuff projects is that it is easy for people > to join the effort. I don't think they meant core project as in a subproject of Wicket, hosted at the ASF. I think they meant a core wicket-annotations project at wicketstuff that others could "lean on" > > Eelco > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
