and there is always Session.bind();
On 6/14/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
he just has to call dirty() when he alters a session and wants to store it
On 6/14/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm wondering whether it still is a good idea to automatically mark
> pages as stateless if there are no 'statefull' components/ callbacks
> on it. It's not so much a problem that the page isn't stored - it
> isn't as there aren't any non-bookmarkable callbacks to it - but it
> can be a problem that a session isn't automatically created. See for
> example
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-noob-question-about-wicket-p11113903.html
>
> I'm not sure... on the one hand I like it that Wicket tries to be as
> efficient as it can be with storing stuff and creating sessions. On
> the other hand, like the referenced thread shows (if I'm right there),
> it can lead to situations people don't immediately understand. I'm
> leaning towards prefering the current situation, but I thought this
> would be a good time to get your opinions on this.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Eelco
>
