I agree as well. I guess, what I want to do is push out a working
version of jyve2 asap. So that we don't tick off people with a product
that dosen't even compile. My vote for webmacro was just to keep one
section of the code base constant while we get jyve2 working. But
I'll do whatever the majority wants.
mike
.
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 06:50:36PM +0200, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
> Hi Mike
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Mike Haberman wrote:
>
> > phase 1. separate the sql/business logic from code base.
> > factor out some of the other common stuff I see.
> > get all the templating stuff to work right.
> > I vote to stick with webmacro for now.
>
> I tend for using rather Velocity (instead of webmacro), mostly for the
> following reasons:
> - Velocity is "our own product; in case changes are needed there, things
> get much easier; same people Velocity/Turbine;
> for sure no licensing troubles
> - Velocity is more promissing; already now it seams to perfrom much
> better than webmacro; better parser
> - It would be great to have a running example for velocity; see also
> discussions on Turbine list about Jyve as an example for Turbine
>
> other opinions?
>
> T: Bernie
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/main/mail.html>
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/main/mail.html>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
