I love this idea! Would it possible instead to make portable CDI support instead of binding to a specific implantation? The CDI api jar is in central. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 17, 2011, at 6:53, Clint Popetz <clint@42lines.net> wrote:


I have a proposal from one of the wicket committers (Igor Vaynberg, who is also one of my employees) to transition seam-wicket to become a wicket module that integrates wicket with weld, so that it's supported by the wicket team.  This is a net win, in my opinion, because (a) the only code in seam wicket is really just code to configure wicket's request cycle to start/stop conversations and perform injection and has no other seam dependencies, (b) this allows the release to be correctly synced to the wicket releases, which we currently lag and are thus not compatible with, and (c) he has more time to maintain this than I do, and would do a better job of it.

Is this acceptable to the seam team?  The only thing I really need is for the weld 1.1.1 artifacts to be in the central m2 repo, because wicket is published there and the central repo doesn't let you have dependencies on non-central-repo artifacts.  Is that reasonable/possible?


Clint Popetz
Scalable Web Application Development
seam-dev mailing list