wicket 1.5 first 1.4 has to be released
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Wayne Pope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Hi, > > Francisco and I here where discussing whether we could figure a way of > having some form of static/compile time checking on our > (Compound)PropertyModels, as I'm a bit concerned long term about some nasty > runtime bugs that might slip through the testing coverage. Francisco found > this thread - I'm wondering what the status is? I had a look at: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1327 > > and there doesn't look like any activity since Feb. Anyone been using this > or come up with a different solution? > > Ideally I think it would be just great if we had an eclipse plugin that > could just check for this (a bit like checkstyle or something) but a > runtime > solution as proposed above seems really smart as well. However I'd rather > keep is 100% java (ie not cglib) if possible. > > Thanks for any update if anyone knows anything! > Wayne > > > > > > Johan Compagner wrote: > > > > no i really dont like that > > then everywhere there code they need to do that, that is not an option. > > and they have to program themselfs agains the proxy api. I dont want that > > developers also have the learn/do that > > This is something commons-proxy needs to do > > > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:29 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > wrote: > > > >> Couldn't you also do: > >> > >> ProxyFactory pf = ...; > >> new SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(pf, customer); > >> > >> So, the client tells you what proxy factory implementation to use. > >> > >> On 3/8/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > I see the JIRA, I'll go ahead and start the discussion on the dev > list. > >> > > >> > > >> > On 3/8/08, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > On 3/8/08, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > for wicket this is a feature it really should have > >> > > > now it defeats the purpose i have to make a decission in wicket > >> which > >> > > > factory i use > >> > > > Then i can just as well directly compile against cglib. > >> > > > I cant make the api that way that the developer has to give > that > >> factory to > >> > > > use. That would be completely horrible, > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > You could always implement your own brand of discovery for your > >> > > project (perhaps by using the service discovery feature built into > >> the > >> > > jdk). > >> > > > >> > > I like the idea of splitting it (and doing it the slf4j way rather > >> > > than the JCL way). I have actually suggested that we start an > >> > > exploratory branch of JCL to make it work more like slf4j (we've > >> been > >> > > talking about this since 2005). Anyway, if you file a JIRA issue, > >> > > I'll make sure we have a discussion with the other devs. For your > >> > > immediate purposes, commons-discovery is available also. > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/CompoundModel-based-on-proxies-tp15317807p20222077.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] > >
