Apache Wicket is a Flawed Framework

[Eric Kizaki]

Violates Dry:  You must repeat the component hierarchy of your widgets that are in HTML in Java Code for no good reason.  If you move your widget around in the html it will break the Java and you get a stack trace if you change the nesting.  You have to keep these two files synched.  A JSP file is more maintainable.  At least the view code is in one place.
 
Not previewable:  One of the supposed benefits of Wicket is a clean template that could make pages previewable for designers.  First, we don't have seperate designers at my company.  Second, it is better if the samer person does development and design.  Third, if you use extends your page will not be priviewable outside an application server running Wicket.  This supposed benefit does not exist.

Violates MVC:  It smashes view and controller code into the same Java file.  You have code that regulates page flow and code that changes css attributes in the same file.  Even Spring MVC had better separation of concerns.  JSP/Servlets with Spring MVC is better.

Excessively verbose and complicated:  What is a LoadableDetachableModel?  The learning curve for Wicket is immense.  

Breaks POJOS:  A real POJO does not need to implement an interface or extend a class.  Wicket forces your beans to be Serializable.  This is like using EJBs in how it forced you to implement interfaces.

Terrible AJAX:  Compared to a few lines of jQuery AJAX is excessively complicated and verbose in Wicket.  A lot of things like “AJAX” links should not be done via “AJAX” at all.  Hiding a div on the client would simply be done with JavaScript on the client.  Wicket better not require a server request for that.  You also have no JSON support and good luck debugging any JavaScript or AJAX in Firefox.  Instead you have to use the subpar Wicket debugging.

HTML5:  No support for HTML 5 form elements unless you upgrade to Wicket 1.5.  You will get a stack trace.  The upgrade to Wicket 1.5 is painful and will break your code.  Good luck getting this to work with jQuery mobile.

Bad Defaults:  Most pages are stateless.  The default for Wicket is stateful.  So if I want a decent URL and a bookmarkable page I have to mount the page and use a bookmarkable page link with page parameters.  Using page parameters is worse than how Spring MVC does binding.  I have to keep doing this over and over for each page.  There is too much work involved to get a decent stateless page with a nice URL. This should be the default.

Interferes with other libraries:  It screws up your jQuery code.  It forces you into a restrictive way of doing web-development:  the Wicket Way.  

Causes a redeploy whenever you add anything:  Maybe Java developers are used to this, but in any other web development environment I do not need to redeploy after adding a text box to the page.  It is completely absurd.  Only with JRebel is this alleviated.  No, embedded Jetty in debug mode still slow.  Even a simple JSP file has hot reloading on Tomcat and if I make a change to my view code the changes are immediately viewable in the browser when I refresh.  This is WITHOUT JRebel.  

HTTPSession Objects are not hard:  Most pages do not need state.  If you do use HTTPSession it is simple.  Can you use a map?  Then you can use HTTPSession.  This is less comlicated than most Wicket code.

Stateful Component based framework are a terrible idea:  Even at the theoretical level this is a bad idea. It is a leaky abstraction over a simple request/response cycle.  It made something simple and made it overly complicated.  This remind me of Hibernate and ORMS.  I disagree that we should abstract things to this level and do everything in verbose Java.  People are dropping Hibernate and going back to native SQL and Spring JDBC template.  SQL and the relational model are easy.  Working with HTTP requests is easy too.  What was wrong with JSPs/Servlets?  Keep it simple stupid.  We know JSF was too complicated and it was terrible.  Spring MVC is better and has rest support.  It just works with Spring and has great support for the JSON Jackson mapper.  

[Sven Meier]

Thanks for the laugh. Where are the irony tags?

Sven

Am 17.11.2011 16:44, schrieb Eric Kizaki:

> Violates Dry:  You must repeat the component hierarchy of your widgets that
> are in HTML in Java Code for no good reason.  If you move your widget around
> in the html it will break the Java and you get a stack trace if you change
> the nesting.  You have to keep these two files synched.  A JSP file is more
> maintainable.  At least the view code is in one place.
>
> Not previewable:  One of the supposed benefits of Wicket is a clean template
> that could make pages previewable for designers.  First, we don't have
> seperate designers at my company.  Second, it is better if the samer person
> does development and design.  Third, if you use extends your page will not
> be priviewable outside an application server running Wicket.  This supposed
> benefit does not exist.
>
> Violates MVC:  It smashes view and controller code into the same Java file.
> You have code that regulates page flow and code that changes css attributes
> in the same file.  Even Spring MVC had better separation of concerns.
> JSP/Servlets with Spring MVC is better.
>
> Excessively verbose and complicated:  What is a LoadableDetachableModel?
> The learning curve for Wicket is immense.
>
> Breaks POJOS:  A real POJO does not need to implement an interface or extend
> a class.  Wicket forces your beans to be Serializable.  This is like using
> EJBs in how it forced you to implement interfaces.
>
> Terrible AJAX:  Compared to a few lines of jQuery AJAX is excessively
> complicated and verbose in Wicket.  A lot of things like “AJAX” links should
> not be done via “AJAX” at all.  Hiding a div on the client would simply be
> done with JavaScript on the client.  Wicket better not require a server
> request for that.  You also have no JSON support and good luck debugging any
> JavaScript or AJAX in Firefox.  Instead you have to use the subpar Wicket
> debugging.
>
> HTML5:  No support for HTML 5 form elements unless you upgrade to Wicket
> 1.5.  You will get a stack trace.  The upgrade to Wicket 1.5 is painful and
> will break your code.  Good luck getting this to work with jQuery mobile.
>
> Bad Defaults:  Most pages are stateless.  The default for Wicket is
> stateful.  So if I want a decent URL and a bookmarkable page I have to mount
> the page and use a bookmarkable page link with page parameters.  Using page
> parameters is worse than how Spring MVC does binding.  I have to keep doing
> this over and over for each page.  There is too much work involved to get a
> decent stateless page with a nice URL. This should be the default.
>
> Interferes with other libraries:  It screws up your jQuery code.  It forces
> you into a restrictive way of doing web-development:  the Wicket Way.
>
> Causes a redeploy whenever you add anything:  Maybe Java developers are used
> to this, but in any other web development environment I do not need to
> redeploy after adding a text box to the page.  It is completely absurd.
> Only with JRebel is this alleviated.  No, embedded Jetty in debug mode still
> slow.  Even a simple JSP file has hot reloading on Tomcat and if I make a
> change to my view code the changes are immediately viewable in the browser
> when I refresh.  This is WITHOUT JRebel.
>
> HTTPSession Objects are not hard:  Most pages do not need state.  If you do
> use HTTPSession it is simple.  Can you use a map?  Then you can use
> HTTPSession.  This is less comlicated than most Wicket code.
>
> Stateful Component based framework are a terrible idea:  Even at the
> theoretical level this is a bad idea. It is a leaky abstraction over a
> simple request/response cycle.  It made something simple and made it overly
> complicated.  This remind me of Hibernate and ORMS.  I disagree that we
> should abstract things to this level and do everything in verbose Java.
> People are dropping Hibernate and going back to native SQL and Spring JDBC
> template.  SQL and the relational model are easy.  Working with HTTP
> requests is easy too.  What was wrong with JSPs/Servlets?  Keep it simple
> stupid.  We know JSF was too complicated and it was terrible.  Spring MVC is
> better and has rest support.  It just works with Spring and has great
> support for the JSON Jackson mapper.
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4080411.html
> Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Wilhelmsen Tor Iver]

Ah, it's been a while since a JSF/JSP zealot bothered to annoy Wicket users.

Now go away and cook up a tag library or five.

- Tor Iver

[Adam Gray]

I'm curious why you wasted your time if you have already determined
that "Stateful,
component-based frameworks are a terrible idea."  Html5 + jQuery + Restlet
is over --> http://www.restlet.org/

No framework is for everyone or even the best solution for every problem.
 If you have real suggestions for improvements:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET.  If you're just trolling, I
had a good laugh.

This is not the framework you're looking for.
You can go about your business.
#jedimindtrick


On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Wilhelmsen Tor Iver <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Ah, it's been a while since a JSF/JSP zealot bothered to annoy Wicket
> users.
>
> Now go away and cook up a tag library or five.
>
> - Tor Iver
>

[Nelson Segura]

I am just a user of Wicket, but this make me laugh, since we are
desperately trying to get out of the JSP nightmare and have found
Wicket a quite nice framework. Nice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Gabriel Landon]

Is this April fool's day? Seriously?

[Alex Objelean]

This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced developer.
Eric, if you have troubles in understanding wicket, you are definitely doing it wrong. Wicket is not a silver bullet, but it is a great tool when comparing to existing frameworks.

[willo]

Ooohh... I better double check what I'm writing on this list, Since the FBI
is around ... ;)

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Alex Objelean <[hidden email]>wrote:

> This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an
> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/eric-kizaki/30/2b1/1a4 inexperienced
> developer .
> Eric, if you have troubles in understanding wicket, you are definitely
> doing
> it wrong. Wicket is not a silver bullet, but it is a great tool when
> comparing to existing technologies.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081174.html
> Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

[geraldkw]

"This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced developer. "

This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.

My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation on the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read a lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts dealing with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.

I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.

If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a chance of changing my mind.

geraldkw

[aksarben]

IMHO, your post looks at the wrong question (i.e., is Wicket perfect?). Of
course it's not. No framework is.

A better question is: How does it compare to OTHER frameworks? This is
subjective of course, but in my personal opinion it is far better than any
other framework I've tried (Struts, JSP, ColdFusion, etc.).  Yes, it has a
learning curve, but so does any framework.

Where I DO agree with you is that the documentation can be improved. But
from what I've seen, it's improving as it matures.

"RAM /abr./: Rarely Adequate Memory."



From:   geraldkw <[hidden email]>
To:     [hidden email]
Date:   11/17/2011 02:54 PM
Subject:        Re: Apache Wicket is a Flawed Framework



"This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an
inexperienced
developer. "

This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't
effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.

My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation
on
the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read
a
lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts
dealing
with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a
fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.

I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not
heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web
programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web
programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.

If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a
chance of changing my mind.

geraldkw


--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081206.html

Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]




**

This email and any attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any use, review, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance by others, and any forwarding of this email or its contents, without the express permission of the sender is strictly prohibited by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, delete the e-mail and destroy all copies.
**

[anantasthana]

First ofc all I do not see any need to convince you you can take it or leave it. 1 there is an awesome set of examples if you search for wicket examples, also there are a lot of other extensions or plug ins in wicket extensions , wicket stuff, wi query j query that support all ajax functionality. This forum as you noticed is great to get place to get answers. As far as not having as extensive of documentation wicket is relatively newer so obviously it will take a bit.
------Original Message------
From: geraldkw
To: [hidden email]
ReplyTo: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Apache Wicket is a Flawed Framework
Sent: Nov 17, 2011 12:05 PM

"This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced
developer. "

This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't
effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.

My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation on
the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read a
lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts dealing
with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a
fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.

I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not
heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web
programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web
programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.

If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a
chance of changing my mind.

geraldkw


--
View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081206.html
Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Peter Ertl-3]

Nice post, Eric!

Wicket people are a humorous folk and always appreciate good entertainment :-)

Am 17.11.2011 um 22:02 schrieb [hidden email]:

> First ofc all I do not see any need to convince you you can take it or leave it. 1 there is an awesome set of examples if you search for wicket examples, also there are a lot of other extensions or plug ins in wicket extensions , wicket stuff, wi query j query that support all ajax functionality. This forum as you noticed is great to get place to get answers. As far as not having as extensive of documentation wicket is relatively newer so obviously it will take a bit.
> ------Original Message------
> From: geraldkw
> To: [hidden email]
> ReplyTo: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Apache Wicket is a Flawed Framework
> Sent: Nov 17, 2011 12:05 PM
>
> "This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced
> developer. "
>
> This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't
> effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.
>
> My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation on
> the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read a
> lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts dealing
> with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a
> fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.
>
> I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not
> heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web
> programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web
> programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.
>
> If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a
> chance of changing my mind.
>
> geraldkw
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081206.html
> Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Gaetan Zoritchak-2]

I must admit that I agree with you. While I think Wicket is a
great framework, the documentation is not up to par. This tool seems a
little too elitist. "If you're strong enough you will find
a great framework." It's a shame because even if the mailing list is very
effective it slows down the adoption of wicket.

2011/11/17 geraldkw <[hidden email]>

> "This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced
> developer. "
>
> This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't
> effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.
>
> My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation on
> the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read a
> lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts
> dealing
> with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a
> fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.
>
> I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not
> heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web
> programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web
> programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.
>
> If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a
> chance of changing my mind.
>
> geraldkw
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081206.html
> Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

[Nelson Segura]

You might/might not be right about documentation. This is usually true
of most frameworks when you move from the "Hello World" program to a
real life app.

The original message said little to nothing about documentations. It
is basically comparing Wicket to JSPs, and saying JSP are better. It
might be true for some people. For me, that have been working in JSPs
for a long while, it is very humorous :D

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Igor Vaynberg-2]

* there are three books written about wicket: two for beginners and
one for intermediate-advanced users.
* there is a searchable mailing list archive that spans years upon
years of users asking questions and getting answers.
* there is a wiki that lists examples and has some good articles.
* there is stack overflow questions and answers.

is there an answer to every single possible question out there? of
course not. no framework has that. look at projects like spring and
hibernate. do those have great documentation? i bet you would say
"yes". are their mailing lists any less busy than our own? no. so what
does that say?

if i had to make up a number i would say that armed with the resources
i listed you would be able to answer about 80% of your own questions.
and i think that is a pretty good number. there is a very active user
list to help you answer questions you cant answer yourself, usually
faster then a commercial support contract. for free.

not too shabby.

-igor

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Gaetan Zoritchak
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I must admit that I agree with you. While I think Wicket is a
> great framework, the documentation is not up to par. This tool seems a
> little too elitist. "If you're strong enough you will find
> a great framework." It's a shame because even if the mailing list is very
> effective it slows down the adoption of wicket.
>
> 2011/11/17 geraldkw <[hidden email]>
>
>> "This is not an april fool's day, it is just an opinion of an inexperienced
>> developer. "
>>
>> This illustrates one of the traditional logical fallacies. If you can't
>> effectively attack the argument, attack the speaker.
>>
>> My biggest problem with Wicket is that I haven't found any documentation on
>> the web that really lets me get a solid grasp on the key concepts. I read a
>> lot of poorly written "documentation", weak examples and forum posts
>> dealing
>> with something that is only vaguely related to my goals, maybe learn a
>> fragment of useful info, and then suffer while trying to apply it.
>>
>> I haven't looked a Wicket in Action or other Wicket Books, but I have not
>> heard good things. Also, this is the Internet Age and this is web
>> programming. I have no problem finding documentation on other web
>> programming languages/frameworks like I do with Wicket.
>>
>> If I am wrong, point me to some solid learning materials, and you stand a
>> chance of changing my mind.
>>
>> geraldkw
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Wicket-is-a-Flawed-Framework-tp4080411p4081206.html
>> Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[robmcguinness]

i'm baffled when people say the documentation is poor, the javadocs are excellent and like igor said there are some great books (blogs too!). books and blogs get outdated fast since technlogy is rapidly advancing, so use the source luke!. Not only will you learn Wicket, but I guarantee your Java skills will improve.

awesome examples:

• https://github.com/apache/wicket (scan over the unit test, best way to learn any framework not just wicket)
• https://github.com/55minutes/fiftyfive-wicket (fantastic)
• https://github.com/42Lines
• https://github.com/wicketstuff/core (a gem, tons of examples on how to pretty much do anything)
• http://code.google.com/p/wiquery/source/checkout
• https://github.com/jolira/wicket-stateless (wicket stateless is excellent, even easier with wicket 1.5)
• https://github.com/reaktor/oegyscroll (endless pagination)
• http://code.google.com/p/wiquery/source/browse/core (jquery)
• http://code.google.com/p/jqwicket/source/browse/ (jquery, learn from the code and roll your own if it doesn't fit your needs, super easy
• https://github.com/rjnichols/visural-wicket (great ui tools)
• https://xaloon.googlecode.com/svn/ (excellent!)

rob

[sthomps]

As gerald mentioned address the content - not the speaker, much more effective.  

i'll address a few of your points and bring up a few of my own.  I'm sure the others can be addressed with thoughtful/intelligent responses.

Violates DRY:  There is a reason that HTML is separated from your corresponding Java component (not every html snippet has to have a component btw).  Behavior is not allowed in your HTML and that makes me happy.  I can have a Human Factors/Web designer do what they do best.  Design a beautiful, high fidelity prototype that has taken actual user need in mind with plain ol HTML/JS/CSS.  

I've seen data driven UI's done by backend programmers - not so nice. I know because I've done them myself.

Not having behavior embedded in your view like a JSP/Facelet means that when something goes wrong with a page, I have one place to look - in the corresponding Java component.  No hidden loops tucked away in that page, no calls to a Java API embedded within a mess of HTML code - clean separation.

Breaks POJOS:  The data being stored in your model doesn't have to implement an interface.  See this response http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/confusion-about-Wicket-models-and-serialization-td1933714.html

A couple of things I think Wicket could improve upon is when you don't want back button support and having to worry about PageMaps being stored in the users session & disk.  As this is a corner case for the most part in the web app world, I can live with what I have.

In that same vein, having to deal with PageExpiration exceptions when back button support is not needed and I don't want my users to encounter this when an Ajax action takes place.  Again this is not the norm and there's a workaround but it's hacky.

As mentioned no UI framework is perfect.  All have their strengths and weaknesses and usually those depend on your point of view, coding style, time of day...

[Attila Király]

Currently a link to this mail is the most popular on dzone:
http://www.dzone.com/links/apache_wicket_is_a_flawed_framework.html

Attila

[Jeroen Steenbeeke]

I really liked the comment by javakata on that post. Counters every
argument with a counter-example and doesn't attack the speaker once.

2011/11/18 Attila Király <[hidden email]>:
> Currently a link to this mail is the most popular on dzone:
> http://www.dzone.com/links/apache_wicket_is_a_flawed_framework.html
>
> Attila
>



--
Jeroen Steenbeeke
www.fortuityframework.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[nino martinez wael]

Sensational news are always a hit, even when not true.

Any tool can be misused. With great power comes great responsibility.

-Nino

2011/11/18 Attila Király <[hidden email]>

> Currently a link to this mail is the most popular on dzone:
> http://www.dzone.com/links/apache_wicket_is_a_flawed_framework.html
>
> Attila
>