+1
we, for example, are currently using Torque standalone. We are using 2.1
now.
I also have a feeling that it makes sense not to bind torque's dev cycle to
Turbine's.
fedor.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 7:23 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Torque as a Persistence Layer
>
>
> Hi,
>
> After some discussion on Friday in #turbine, we decided that Torque
> will move toward becoming a self contained, stand-alone persistence
> layer.
>
> The upshot is that the code that is currently in the DBService will be
> moved into the Torque repository so that Torque will function
> independently.
> The DBService in Fulcrum will become a service wrapper for Torque.
>
> We also hope that Torque will become a JDO implementation. With the
> complete separation of Torque as a persistence layer we're hoping we
> attract more developers and users.
>
> --
>
> jvz.
>
> Jason van Zyl
>
> http://tambora.zenplex.org
> http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
> http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
> http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
