To speak as an end-user: > 1) Who uses 2.0 for serious projects? We use 2.0 in a serious project for mobile patient data acquisition. We plan the rollout for about next week (despite wicket 2.0 is not even in beta status).
> 2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you prefer 1.3's We prefer the 2.0 constructor. At the first sight it looked a little bit strange. The 1.3 style felt much more "java like", having an object and activationg a method of this object instead of just creating new objects with no anchor (no variable addressing the newly created object). But the discussion about the advantages was convincing and after using it for some months now, the top down style was very usefull. > 3) If we would ever backtrack on the constructor change (*if*, don't panic > for now) how much trouble would that give you? I don't believe that this would be a real problem. The task consists for changig changing new Component(this into this.add(new Component in most cases. But I was convinced of the advantages that the new constructor has and the question is now 1. Are the proposed advantages no longer advantages 2. Does the new constructor make anything impossible that was possible with the old style contructor? 3. What does the wicket 1.x users prevent to switch to the 2.0 style that goes beyond a simple syntax change? Stefan Lindner
<<winmail.dat>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
