On Sab, 26 de Febrero de 2005, 8:09, Vadim Gritsenko dijo: > Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: >> Leszek is eager to remove all sorts of counter intuitive constructions >> from JXTG, which is good. Now the question is how we should do this. >> >> I propose that we (in the trunk): >> >> * As soon as we have done some more testing of the refactored JXTG (all >> help is welcome), we remove the original one and rename the refactored >> one to o.a.c.generation.JXTemplateGenerator. This should not introduce >> any incompabilities and we get better behaviour for non flow use, code >> that is easier to maintain and we shouldn't have two implementations of >> the same thing. It will take some time before the refactoring of the >> internal API stabilizes, but that should not affect the use of JXTG. >> >> * Freeze the development of JXTG (except for bug fixes) and keep it as >> is for back compatibility. > > +1
+1 > > >> * Do all new development in CTemplate, >> o.a.c.generation.CTemplateGenerator (or maybe just TemplateGenerator). >> In CTemplate we can remove things that we don't like anymore and add >> better constructions. > > Or may be > o.a.c.template.generation.TemplateGenerator? > > It's has own block, template, so it can have own package as well. +1 Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
