"Stephen Haberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I don't know about having one version right now... Since I use > > Scarab at work, that is running under version 3.0. And since > > Scarab seems pretty full fledged ;-), I would say that if it is > > good enough for Scarab, then it is good enough for me. > > I'd thought the same thing for awhile. And I do think it's great that > Turbine was a sort of poster child that some of the Turbine developers > work on to showcase the technology and keep development active and what > not. > > But just because Scarab uses T3 doesn't mean T3 is a good code base (not > that it's bad, but in comparison to Summit) and should be released. > > I'd venture to say that Scarab could/should be easily ported to Summit, > assuming Summit becomes T3/T4, as Turbine is just a framework that sits > above the actions/templates and handles hooking them together (Fulcrum > aside). As long as Summit does things the same way, albeit much cleaner > internally, and Plexus can handle Fulcrum services with little > modification, I see little reason for not moving to the new Summit code > base and letting T3 stay at alpha.
I guess that's easy enough to say when you don't have products based on the code. However, that is unreasonable without an existing replacement in Apache CVS. -- Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
