On 11 Oct 2006, at 20:06, Eelco Hillenius wrote:
I'd like to chip in here to state that by what I proposed I don't want to make Wicket suddenly a stateless framework or something.
What you're proposing sounds good to me (a complete novice, I must emphasise), but I think you hit the nail on the head there. Wicket is fantastic for the work I'm doing precisely because it /is/ stateful. I'd hate to see wicket going down the route of obsessing over the reduction of server-side state management, because it'd lose a lot of its appeal in the process.
Thanks, Paul
