Actually, yes, that's even better. (If there ever will be a FM 4, it can still use org.apache.freemarker4 after all.)
Tuesday, December 1, 2015, 11:05:03 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > To keep things simple why not org.apache.freemarker? > > Jacques > > Le 01/12/2015 18:58, Woonsan Ko a écrit : >> +1 on all you described for FTL3. >> >> Just a side note, I like 'org.apache.freemarker3' better as new >> package name. I saw a similar pattern in Apache Commons. e.g, >> org.apache.commons.lang3. >> >> Regards, >> >> Woonsan >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Daniel Dekany <ddek...@freemail.hu> wrote: >>> Sunday, November 29, 2015, 11:28:31 AM, Daniel Dekany wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>>> - Dropping all the not-recommended-anymore and deprecated features, >>>> obviously. There's a lot, trust me... >>>> - Rename things that has confusing name, or are in the wrong package >>>> - Unify the concept of macros and (user-defined-)directives. Same with >>>> functions and methods. These are separate concepts yet similar in >>>> the current code base. >>>> - Parser/syntax: >>>> - FTL3: >>>> - Null-aware, has a behavior that's more like Groovy's >>>> - Hash "map" type instead of "hash" (i.e., no string-keys-only BS >>>> anymore) >>>> - Better whitespace handling >>>> - Has simpler, more regular syntax. >>>> - Designed to make user-defined dialects possible >>>> - Some minor changes in expression syntax... doesn't mater for now. >>>> - Separately pluggable expression language and "outer" language >>>> - Made with IDE and template-introspection support in mind >>>> - Template loading/caching: >>>> - A better version of the TemplateLoader mechanism. The current one >>>> has problems with being effective with DB for example. >>>> - In general, template loading/caching need to be more pluggable. >>>> Right now it's often hard to reuse your framework's existing >>>> caching facility for example. >>>> >>>> So that's a FM 3.0, plus whatever I have forgotten about. That's a lot >>>> of work you see there, but it's rewarding. >>> And one that I have forgotten: >>> >>> - Modularize FM. There should be a bare-bone engine Maven module, and >>> then a separate Servlet Maven module, a JSP Maven module, Jython >>> module (if there's still interest in that), etc. (Maybe even XML >>> support should be separate.) This will also help to migrate the >>> project build to to Maven. Another aspect of this is that 3.0 can be >>> released without all the other modules to be cleaned up and ready >>> (especially Serlvet/JSP will be a substantial work). >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks, >>> Daniel Dekany >>> > -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
