velocity-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tim Joyce" <>
Subject Re: Plans
Date Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:01:28 GMT
> I second that. Though I am Turbine user (and developer) and I'm looking
> to using these two combined, I think that Velocity shouldn't depend on
> in any aspect. Servlet framewok and template processor are two different
> This is a problem with current WebMacro - it's trying to be both at the
same time.

yes, but to be fair, WM now works very well as a stand alone template

      WM wm = new WM();
      Context context = wm.getContext();
      Template template = wm.getTemplate("Test.wm");
      String expanded = (String) template.evaluate(context);

> > I was under the impression that following yesterday's meeting, we would
> > be working on the same codebase from very soon (next week?).  This would
> > the WebMacro codebase, perhaps including the new Velocity parser.  The
> > priority is to get Apache Webmacro 1.0 released ASAP, this would make a
> > of people very happy.
> AFAIK, code merge isn't going to happen anytime soon. The goal of Apache
> is to provide stable and fully functional distribution of WebMacro
available now,
> along with supporting it's current users and their particular needs.
> The goal of Velocity is to create fresh implementation of WebMacro's
> that will be technically superiour to current WebMacro and in the future
> possibly replace it (see JServ & Tomcat).

yes, I have now understood this.  The JServ / Tomcat transition appeared to
work well, was there any resentment on the part of JServ developers?  Or did
they clearly see that their code needed a complete rewrite.

I appreciate you have had very little time to review the WM code, but apart
from the Parser, what technical deficiencies do you feel it has?



View raw message