Interestingly we used a similar approach with using classes as pseudo enums.
Not being able to extend enums is a bit suckfull. igor.vaynberg wrote: > > the problem is that the enum would have to live *inside* the > wicketstuffauth code. so wicketstuffauth would be the library that > would need to define the enum - and it doesnt know about your > application specific roles. at least this was the issue when it was > first being designed. i havent really looked at it since than. > > -igor > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-does-org.apache.wicket.authorization-revolve-around-string-tokens--tp20723820p20728137.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]
