Gunnar R�nning wrote:
>
> * "Henning P. Schmiedehausen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |
>
> | >3) servlet container is housed in the TDK
> |
> | -1
> |
> | I'd prefer "servlet container is housed somewhere else". I e.g. run a
> | standard apache/tomcat setup and I simply adjust pathes in there.
> |
>
> [snip] and then...
>
> | >4) all sql is generated by the TDK, even test data could be
> | > handled by an XML config and Torque would generate the
> | > inserts for the target database.
> |
> | I'd like to vote -1 here but I am open to good arguments. ;-)
> |
> | I e.g. develop my turbine apps right from the Turbine CVS archive. No
> | TDK involved at all. I don't want to get locked into the TDK at all (I
> | consider it diametral to my way of working. ;-) )
> |
>
> Well, if you don't use the TDK then you shouldn't be to worried about
> what goes the TDK - right ?
>
> I like that the TDK is self contained and includes a servlet container.
> That is after all the purpose of the TDK, to let new developers get
> up and running with Turbine quickly.
>
I think the point is (for example): do not make developers who use
turbine outside the tdk have to use the tdk to generate such things as
the sql for the security classes which are part of turbine. Since
torque is being split into a seperate project and the security stuff
will be in fulcrum, I would say that fulcrum would need to use torque to
generate the classes/sql and this should be self-contained. fulcrum
should not rely on the tdk being present.
john mcnally
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
