+1 for Wicket extensions. Not sure if I want this to be yet another
seperate project though.

Eelco


On 9/15/05, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>  
>  I've just played with the dojo support and found it working pretty good,
> *but* ...  I had immediately the need to use an other version of the dojo.js
> file.
>  
>  Now this left me thinking that the libraries of dojo and scriptaculous will
> probably have shorter cycles than the wicket core. I therefore propose to
>  move these two packages with Ajax specific handlers (and later components)
> into their own libaries and give them their own release cycles.
>  Giving these two packages their own project will allow quick turn arounds
> and specific components developed for each library.
>  
>  Note that the generic Ajax handler and support remain in Wicket core. Just
> the specific library support will be extracted.
>  
>  May I have your votes please?
>  
>  Martijn
>


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own
Sony(tm)PSP.  Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop

Reply via email to