What is it specifically that you will benefit from taking this into Wicket? What plans do you have and what would be to the better?

Please enlighten me, but what's the problem for "the resource you're trying to convince" of not contributing under the Seam umbrella. Why is it a problem for the wicket team to stay in sync with releases? Isn't it approx a year between every Wicket release?


On Aug 17, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Clint Popetz 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