Here are mine: > The questions I'm seeking answers to are the following: > > - should the post 1.2 version of Wicket involve both changes?
No. The constructor changes first, we can call it 1.3, and that version should be primarily just that change and some minor ones around it. > - should we make different releases for either change, and thus > postponing 1.5 to > Wicket 3? Yes. If we call the constructor change Wicket 1.3, we can call the JDK 1.5 version Wicket 2.0. > - how many of you still require for current or future projects to run > on JDK 1.4? > - how many would object to having a retroweaver build of a JDK 5 Wicket, > which > enables you to run 1.5 code on a 1.4 JRE? I agree with Igor that we should move to 1.5, and don't wait for a year to do it. Not everyone will be happy with it, but we'll have a very decent version out with 1.3 which we should support for a long time (by which I mean bug fixing, not so much back porting new features). Moving to 1.5 will eleminate a few of the weak features we still have and can't fix. As Wicket is all about Java code and strong typing, it sucks we can't have that strong typing in one of our major concepts yet - the model. With generics we can have this. I think that alone is worth the move, and as a lot of other frameworks - either for UI stuff or other purposes - already moved to 1.5, I don't think it is too early. We are already a year further since our first 1.5 discussions. Eelco ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
