Sorry for not getting back on this earlier but today I spend a few hours reviewing the patch.
Well, the fact that its a big mix of both general javadoc and comment improvements (many unrelated to this issue) as well as the portlet2.0 enhancements/changes
made it very time consuming to see the wood from the trees.
So, I've spend my time trying to separate these two, as well as cleanup some erroneous changes and/or adding missing things like required License Headers.
The javadoc and comment changes I have now committed, so that only the real functional changes and enhancements for portlet2.0 remain.
Of those remaining changes, I created a new patch,
WICKET-1620-portlet2.0.patch, and attached it.
If you have more (independent) javadoc/comment improvements coming up (great!), it would be better to provide those separately, not mixed up within patches for this issue.
Sorry to say that my time is now up for today, and next week I'll be abroad again for a client.
I'll try to review the remaining patch during the evenings next week though.
For now, one thing I encountered trying to build with the patch: there seems to be some errors in the PortletEvent Generics setup.
If I execute (from the wicket project): mvn clean install, I get the following compilation errors:
wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/protocol/http/portlet/events/IPortletEventService.java:[44,79] type parameter T is not within its bound
wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/protocol/http/portlet/events/IPortletEventService.java:[53,82] type parameter T is not within its bound
wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/protocol/http/portlet/events/BasicStringPortletEventListener.java:[23,46] type parameter org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.portlet.events.BasicStringPortletEvent is not within its bound
wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/protocol/http/portlet/events/PortletEventService.java:[58,38] type parameter T is not within its bound
wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/protocol/http/portlet/events/PortletEventService.java:[72,95] type parameter T is not within its bound
So it would be great if you could try to get that fixed first and provide an updated patch.