On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 6:45 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi Clint,

On 17 Oct 2008, at 19:59, Clint Popetz wrote:

Greetings,

I've been working on wicket integration, and I have a number of things done that I'd like to contirbute:

* An ant task to instrument wicket components at build time
* Fixes to make it possible to hot-deploy wicket components that have been instrumented by that task.

Yup, we should definitely support this :-)

Great!

We don't currently have any ability to do anything other than per-application selection of components. Have that discussion here I think.

Ok, let me do some investigation on this first.

Also, with regard to the ant task, I don't know how you want that packaged. Is the plan to keep the just-in-time instrumentation of WEB-INF/wicket (which isn't hot-deployment-compatible) as an option, with build time instrumentation as the default (i.e. the default in seam-gen'd build files?)

I don't see why we need to make either the default, both approaches can coexist I think. It sounds like you want to add Wicket support to seam-gen?

I haven't, and while it would be nice, it's not no my current todo list. At minimum, when support is added to get the seam-gen libraries copied over correctly for a wicket seam-gen component, the instrumentation could be added as well, and I can do that.

Or get rid of the just-in-time thing? Currently I have JavassistInstrumentor extending extending org.apache.tools.ant.Task, but I have it in a separate project to build the task jar. It also could remain in jboss-seam.jar.

I think the ant task should go in it's own JAR.

Should it be its own pom, or just a jar ("jboss-seam-wicket-ant.jar") built alongside jboss-seam-wicket.jar in the jarwicket target? Also, the new jar will need classes in the jboss-seam-wicket.jar; should they be copied into the ant jar so that it stands alone, or just assume that jboss-seam-wicket.jar will live on the build path an have people add the build path to the <taskdef/>'s path?

Thanks,

-Clint