> Presumably it will be replaced with the JSR168 MVC model. Yes.
> (_Implementations_ may still lean on turbine, I dunno about that, but > the spec has a pretty lean and tidy interface.) > There currently is no movement to use turbine within Jetspeed 2 as a default of any kind. We are using Fulcrum for services, however, David is abstracting access into Fulcrum services through a thin access layer so we can swap fulcrum out for something else in future if we need to. *===================================* * Scott T Weaver * * Jakarta Jetspeed Portal Project * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *===================================* > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Grant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 10:13 AM > To: Jetspeed Users List > Subject: RE: keelframework for jetspeed2 > > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Sandeep Dixit wrote: > > > Does that mean that the Turbine MVC model will be replaced by a new > > Jetspeed MVC model? - Sandeep > > Presumably it will be replaced with the JSR168 MVC model. > (_Implementations_ may still lean on turbine, I dunno about that, but > the spec has a pretty lean and tidy interface.) > > -- > jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ > Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ > "My army boots contain everything not in them." - Russell's pair o' Docs. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
