commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul DeCoursey <p...@decoursey.net>
Subject Re: [Jelly] Executable XML vs. Rich Configuration
Date Mon, 23 May 2005 01:36:54 GMT
I like the Jelly name as well.  I use it for all kinds of things, 
mostly scripting.  I can't say I have ever used it for configuration. 
As far as any sort of name change, I don't think it a good idea.  It 
may need better marketing, but does that even fit into the open source 
world?

Paul

On May 21, 2005, at 12:52 AM, Hans Gilde wrote:

> My 2 cents: I got into Jelly as a framework for building Swing GUIs. 
> In this
> case, the Tag model works very well and the ability to implement the
> scripting is also extremely useful.
>
> Unfortunately, the company I did it for laid me off and I have to 
> start the
> whole framework from scratch if I want to publish it open source. 
> However, I
> find Jelly to be rather more than configuration... the name Jelly 
> really
> seems to fit for me.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message