Oh, I have no problem doing that.  The issue is getting the other PMC
members to agree to it.  I had ProxyFactory set up as an interface in
the first place and they strongly suggested that I change it to a
class.

As for the SFL4J-likeness request, I don't think that's too tough.

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Johan Compagner <[email protected]> wrote:
> i am fully conviced that james can do all that. :)
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 19:31, James Carman 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Ok, ok.  I get it.  I get it.  I've got a request in to make Commons
>> Proxy more like SLF4J in that the implementation is "discoverable" at
>> runtime.  I personally agree with you.  I also think ProxyFactory
>> should be made an interface, not a concrete class.  What I would do is
>> jack up the release number if I ever wanted to change it.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Johan Compagner <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > you mean the PropertyModel based on proxies (there is an issue in jira
>> for
>> > that)
>> >
>> > I have some code working yes. But the problem is that commons-proxy isnt
>> > good enough yet to use
>> > (because we in wicket need to make a decision which proxy to use up
>> front)
>> >
>> > Or i could just go for the default jdk proxy.
>> >
>> > the best thing was if commons proxy would work like slf4j
>> >
>> > johan
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 14:44, nino martinez wael <
>> > [email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> This again makes me wonder how the cglibproxy thing are comming along?
>> >>
>> >> 2009/3/25 Erik van Oosten <[email protected]>:
>> >> > Haha, yes ugly, but very clear.
>> >> >
>> >> > In any case, using bind (as on CompoundPropertyModel) works as well.
>> That
>> >> > way you can use proper component ids in combination with XPath-like
>> >> property
>> >> > expression.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Johan Compagner wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> do you really use such ugly id's? :)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 15:15, Erik van Oosten <[email protected]
>> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Interesting.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I think we have something similar. We do stuff like
>> >> >>>  new TextField("/addresses/address[1]/street")
>> >> >>> and this will automatically bind the text field to a node in the XML
>> >> >>> document that was attached to the form.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Regards,
>> >> >>>  Erik.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Jan Kriesten wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I did something like that with XML specifying the form and having a
>> >> >>>> ElementModel
>> >> >>>> binding the form elements to JDOM nodes.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Best regards, --- Jan.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Erik van Oosten
>> >> > http://www.day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > 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]
>>
>>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to