Right - I didn't read the entire series of comments on the JIRA. I did read one that explained why removing the "? extends" was the best solution, and several that agreed with it. I am basing my comments on the vote thread that was on the user list - a change like this will require a vote (as Igor pointed out) - so I won't commit something like this that is not in line with what was voted for.
My vote is still that removing the "? extends" is better from my personal experience - but I don't have a vested interest in whether it makes it into the 1.4 release. While it may be beneficial, it would be out of the ordinary to introduce an API break after we're already to release candidate phase. -- Jeremy Thomerson http://www.wickettraining.com On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brill Pappin <br...@pappin.ca> wrote: > This is an attempt to bring the dropdown and listview into sync. > personally i don't care which way it goes as long as its simple and works, > but I think it pretty important that it be done before the 1.4 release. > > The discussion was continued in the issue, so it's possible that people > were not watching it or voting on it there. I think Jeremy didn't have time > to actually read the issue all the way through or he would have seen why the > patch was the way it was. > > I would like to invite anyone with interest to take a look at: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2137 > > By all means, add your thoughts... as a user of wicket, I certainly *do* > want to to see this make it into the 1.4 release. > > - Brill > > > On 12-Mar-09, at 5:10 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote: > > before applying an api-breaking patch to an rc release we should have >> a vote on the dev list. >> >> -igor >> >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Jeremy Thomerson >> <jer...@wickettraining.com> wrote: >> >>> Unless I'm seeing double - this patch has two problems: >>> >>> 1 - It is the opposite of what was voted on. The vote was to make >>> IModel<List<? extends E>> into IModel<List<E>>. Your patch makes it >>> IModel<? extends List<? extends E>>. >>> >>> 2 - The patch causes compile errors that were not fixed. >>> >>> I have unassigned myself from the task until those issues are addressed >>> or I >>> have time to create my own patch. The best solution would be for someone >>> to >>> submit a proper patch that fixes the two problems above or explain to me >>> what I missed. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> -- >>> Jeremy Thomerson >>> http://www.wickettraining.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Jeremy Thomerson < >>> jer...@wickettraining.com >>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>> I'm reviewing it now. Assuming that it looks fine, and is line with >>>> what >>>> was proposed by the vote thread earlier, I will apply. The vote passed, >>>> so >>>> I don't see a reason not to. I'm not sure how many were binding / >>>> non-binding, but there were eight for, two against. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeremy Thomerson >>>> http://www.wickettraining.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Brill Pappin <br...@pappin.ca> wrote: >>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2137 >>>>> >>>>> - Brill >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > >
