Hi Cristophe,

My assumption had been that the JSPUI would drift into disuse in the future, 
being replaced by Manakin. Hence I had made no noise about the development of 
the JSPUI. However, the recent comment from Mark suggested its not a 'fait 
accompli'. I am not against Manakin in any way, like you we have yet to migrate 
so I have no first hand experience. But it seems to me that its an unfair fight 
at the moment as the JSPUI is so out of date. Including the jars in the pom 
would allow developers to update the jsp's if they were inclined. As things 
stand there is not much incentive to consider sticking with the JSPUI. 

Cheers, Robin. 


  


-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


-----Original Message-----
From: Christophe Dupriez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 24 October 2008 14:22
To: Robin Taylor
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Dspace-devel] JSP 2.0

Hi Robin,

I would like to strongly support your proposal.

But there is one question: will the DSpace community continue to support two UI 
?
Personally, I prefer JSP to Cocoon but I think that supporting two interfaces 
on the long term will be unmanageable...
How people really using Manakin now evaluate this issue? Are they satisfied? Do 
they think JSP are easier, simpler, faster? Or they enjoy new useful features 
with Manakin and are happy with the overall organisation it imposes?

Personally, I still belief "cleaned-up" JSP with a good API to access DSpace 
objects (designed from Manakin experience), some new JSTL tags, some EL 
functions would be easier to learn and use than Cocoon.
But I did not made the transition (still deriving my work form DSPace
1.4.1): I may be completely wrong!!

Have a nice week-end,

Christophe

Robin Taylor a écrit :
> Hi Mark,
>
> I recall a short while ago you commenting on the fact that there had been no 
> clamour from the community for a JSP 2.n based UI, well I would like to start 
> a small scale clamour. Is there any reason why we couldn't include the 
> necessary jar(s) in the daddy pom.xml and the appropriate entries in the 
> web.xml, that would allow those who wished to take advantage of 2.0 features 
> ? I have been making changes to some pages recently and it does my head in 
> having to resort to scripting within the pages.
>
> Cheers, Robin.
>
>
>
>
>




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Dspace-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-devel

Reply via email to