> -----Original Message-----
> From: jon * [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 10:27 PM
>
> #1. "Turbine is more light-weight". I'm not quite sure what
> you mean by that
> ...you really should explain what you mean when you make
> statements like that...
OK, sorry for that "light-weight" ;-)
I mean that Jetspeed/Turbine/Cocoon/(and could probably include most of
the Apache stuff here) is more componetized/"pluggable": it is possible
to deploy just these components that you need, and that fit your needs.
It's more like a framework: you can (more-or-less) easily extend the
functionality (e.g. you can use Cocoon, WebMacro, etc for page
generation) and add you own specific features.
(I have to admit that I'm more familiar with Jetspeed/Turbine, so my
opinion is probably biased.) But still it seems from my first impression
that Zope is more monolithic application: it has it's own DTML language
for templating and content generation while Turbine has a whole array of
different ways (languages) for this.
Also, as you mentioned, Zope has one object-relational mapping package
while Turbine has three...
And finally, if a person is not happy with the current modules, he/she
can always develop his/her own.
> I really wish people would take the time to just read the
> website and make
> informed assumptions instead of making wrong assumptions
> about what these projects are all about.
I agree with you on that... The most annoying is to see that some person
is expressing his/her opinion about some topic and from the statements
it is visible that his/her knowledge is not really up on the level to
make this kind of statements.
But life is a learning experience for all of us ;-)
Neeme
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Please read the FAQ! <http://java.apache.org/faq/>
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/main/mail.html>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
