I don't think that supporting the back button is really important, but I think /scratch that/ consider it obligatory for the 1.0 release. without that, we won't have any leverage over other frameworks.
I also find that it should be as transparent as possible to the user, i.e. no copy/cloning to build. I also consider imposing detachable models on the user a Bad Thing.
I really hope we can come up with something good. Though Gili posted an interesting view on the subject, I don't think that the 'undo operation' is the correct view. When I hit the back button it is not *always* because I want to revert changes, but because I want to choose something else.
Perhaps it is best to put this into the bug tracker with prio 9 (highest), and postpone the discussion until Jonathan is here. I bet there is other stuff we need to take care of which also need addressing. Until Jon is here and we can cut corners by face to face discussions (perhaps have a conference call with Chris?) I'd go for other quick wins.
Martijn
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
I understand, and share, the gut feeling you have against any form of cloning in Wicket. Therefore, I think we should really agree all on this before we put it in any version at all. But, and I have made this an issue a couple of times before, SUPPORTING THE BACKBUTTON IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
