You have +4 votes already. not sure that mine counts, though :)
Alex On 11/30/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, no. We'd have to start a new vote. Which I'm not gonna do this time, as my previous two tries got a very luke-warm response :) Eelco On 11/30/06, Alexei Sokolov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, is it decided that repeaters will move to the core? > > Thanks, > Alex > > On 11/28/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > IMO the great components in the extension's repeater package > > > > should be promoted to the core. It is very easy to miss those > > > > great extensions, just because they are not in core. I feel > > > > disappointed to discover them after 6 months of Wicket hacking... > > > > > > I agree and in fact proposed replacing listview with the repeaters two > > > times before, as - regardless of the problems people have with list > > > views - most think the repeaters work better anyway. > > > > > > So, who else wants to start a vote this time :) > > > > Let me refine this a bit. What I like about the repeaters, and why I > > think they make a better default, is that they make all the choices > > more explicit, so that there won't be any of the nasty surprises as > > with ListView. What I like less about repeaters and that they are more > > verbose to use in general and I think they are harder to get started > > with for beginners (but that's a mere hunch). So, what I would propose > > (again) is to move at least a bunch of repeaters to the core project > > and give them more visibility by replacing a couple of the list view > > based examples we have now with repeaters. We can move the list view > > to extensions or just keep them where they are... both fine by me. The > > main idea behind moving repeaters to core is exactly as Jean-Baptiste > > pointed out: they should be more visible. > > > > Eelco > > > >
