velocity-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Wells <jr...@semiotek.com>
Subject Re: Velocity, WebMacro, and the future
Date Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:07:33 GMT
On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 02:19:46AM -0700, Jon Stevens wrote:
> on 8/26/2000 2:13 AM, "Justin Wells" <jread@semiotek.com> wrote:
> 
> > Ok, on this condition: We rename the project Apache-Webmacro, we put in
> > place the WebMacro code base, and we work on merging your better parser
> > into WM's parsing framework (make it implement org.webmacro.parser and
> > support the DirectiveBuilder architecture).
> 
> Sorry. No more "conditions" games. You already burned your condition limit
> with the previous one.

No games Jon. It was a serious offer. 

My patience is running out. WebMacro will do fine with or without you, 
you just have too far to go to catch up. But, you can draw off enough 
resources that it'll hurt my ability to compete with JSP. 

Right now I'm pretty pissed off with you for violating my trust. And I 
can sure tell you're operating on emotion as well. But logically, what
we need to do here is wind up with your parser integrated into WM
under a license we both like.

It would be tough to merge your parser in under WM's tree but we could
do it. You really haven't implemented anything else. But you will soon,
and every line of code you write from here on in will only make it more
difficult for us to merge. If we don't do it now, later we'll regret 
it and it'll be too late.

> I think Apache Velocity is a much cooler name than WebMacro. I have always
> had a negative view on products that used the word "Web" in their name.
> Totally overused concept.

That sounds caustic but I think you wouldn't even write that if in the
back of your mind you didn't already know what the right thing to do
is here. My name is associated with "WebMacro" and I don't plan to give
up credit for the hard work I've done, nor do I plan to take a year 
long step back from what I'm on the verge of accomplishing. 

WM's architecture is far more flexible than you seem to realize,
and the performance improvements I've made apparently haven't even
dawned on you yet. That sounds patronizing, but really you'll
understand after you've worked on this problem as long as I have.

You view WM as a plug-in to Turbine but that's actually not how most 
people use it. It's an important use, and one I want to support, but 
there are lots of people with a different requirement. You're seeing
WM through your own eyes only, and missing most of the way it 
advantages other users.

Unless you support those users all you'll have is a turbine-plugin.

Justin


Mime
View raw message