That would be great!
A colleague has been voicing the exact same modularization (not related
to Wicket). He would certainly start using it.
Regards,
Erik.
James Carman wrote:
> I've tried pushing through the runtime implementation resolution
> (similar to slf4j), but nobody seems keen on it. At least, they
> didn't answer my emails. So, perhaps I'll just refactor it myself and
> put it out there and see what happens?
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:27 AM, Johan Compagner<
jcompagner@...> wrote:
>
>> this we already kind of have.
>>
>> But it uses currently proxies. And is build on commons proxy that wants us
>> to hard code the proxie implementation
>> that you should use, thats in my eyes a wrong implementations, the whole
>> point of a wrapping class around a proxy
>> is that i dont want to choose at compile time which one i want!
>>
>> But our property model can do what you are describing just fine.
>>
>> johan
>>
>>
>>
>>
--
Erik van Oosten
http://www.day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/
