Hi Sven, On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> wrote:
> Hi Martin, > > >It shouldn't be hard to introduce some abstractions but Wicket is not > quite ready > >for non-Servlet usage at the moment. > > yeah, time to improve that :). > > If anyone provided patches and/or pull requests to remove those > dependencies, I'd be willing to support these changes. > Do you see a big benefit in doing this? Except "better abstractions than now" and "because we can". I might have time to work on this soon but I'll need a good technical reason to do it first. > > Regards > Sven > > > > On 21.06.2015 13:49, Martin Grigorov wrote: > >> Hi >> >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Sven Meier <s...@meiers.net> wrote: >> >> Hi, >>> >>> And why would that be interesting or preferable or whatever? >>>> >>> because Wicket doesn't need servlets actually: Without the JEE baggage >>> you >>> can keep your App smaller. >>> >> >> mean that the frontend needs adoption for both different environments >>>> >>> All JEE related APIs are hidden behind Wicket specific classes and >>> interfaces (e.g. WebResponse), so there should be nothing to adapt in the >>> application itself. >>> >>> Few years ago I've tried to replace Servlet impl with one based on >> Netty. >> There are many places in Wicket core where we use/cast to Servlet APIs. >> For example Form.java does it. Some classes use Cookie. Some internal >> classes use event listeners (PageStoreManager.java). >> I've stopped working on due to lack of time and interest. >> It shouldn't be hard to introduce some abstractions but Wicket is not >> quite >> ready for non-Servlet usage at the moment. >> >> Martin Grigorov >> Freelancer. Available for hire! >> Wicket Training and Consulting >> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov >> >> >> Have fun >>> Sven >>> >>> >>> On 21.06.2015 11:06, Thorsten Schöning wrote: >>> >>> Guten Tag Sven Meier, >>>> am Samstag, 20. Juni 2015 um 20:18 schrieben Sie: >>>> >>>> there seem to be different solutions already, why do you think they >>>> are >>>> >>>>> not promising? >>>>> https://github.com/jetty-project/i-jetty >>>>> >>>>> The commit history doesn't look very active to me and I've read that >>>> Tomcat and newer versions of Jetty rely on JMX, which shall be a no go >>>> on Android. On SO where some unanswered questions about Tomcat on >>>> Android as well. But I'm just at the start of my research and didn't >>>> try anything myself yet. >>>> >>>> Actually it would be interesting to just skip all servlet stuff and >>>> just >>>> >>>>> use an HTTP server: >>>>> https://github.com/NanoHttpd/nanohttpd >>>>> >>>>> And why would that be interesting or preferable or whatever? Besides >>>> the fact that it might be the only working solution at all, of course. >>>> ;-) >>>> I guess it might be faster and such, but would mean that the frontend >>>> needs adoption for both different environments, executing within a >>>> servlet container or not. That's exactly what I would like to avoid as >>>> much as possible. >>>> >>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >>>> >>>> Thorsten Schöning >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > >
