On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Erik Brakkee <erik.brak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think in general, the code should become part of a wicket-cdi project just
> like wicket-spring and wicket-guice already are. I think the wicket
> community is probably a better place to maintain this then the weld project.
> This is because the code could use internal wicket APIs which are more prone
> to change than the CDI APIs which is a standard. So we would catch problems
> in the implementation much earlier. It feels a bit like stealing but I am in
> any case really grateful for the work done by the weld project. This is
> surely going to save a lot of people some time because standard Java EE
> capabilities can be used in wicket.

What I'll do is set it up in wicketstuff.  That way others can
contribute/maintain it too.  I've got permission already, so I can put
it up there sometime this evening.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org

Reply via email to