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
