Jason,
Thanks for that, I have to get my head around the implications.
I am new to open source software projects and I am hooked, it is helping to
expand exponentially my knowledge of java and oo design.
Thanks to all who contribute to these lists, I hope to get to a level where
I feel I can contribute.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 10 September 2001 16:01
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: TemplateContext
>
>
> On 9/10/01 10:54 AM, "David Meaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have had a bit of time recently to experiment with
> Turbine 3.0. It is
> > going to be very difficult to go back to developing in 2.1.
> >
> > I came across something which I don't understand and was
> wondering if I
> > could trouble 3.0 developers.
> >
> > I came to test the TemplateHtmlEmail class and while trying
> to compile I
> > found that the interfaces org.apache.turbine.TemplateContext and
> > org.apache.fulcrum.template.TemplateContext are
> incompatible; both define
> > put(java.lang.String,java.lang.Object), but with different
> return type.
> >
> > In org.apache.turbine.TemplateContext
> > public java.lang.Object put(java.lang.String key,
> java.lang.Object
> > value)
> >
> > In org.apache.fulcrum.template.TemplateContext
> > public void put(java.lang.String key, java.lang.Object value)
> >
> >
> > Is this correct or is it an error?
>
> It is correct.
>
> For Turbine 3.0 we hope to arrive at an API which consists of a set of
> interfaces that are wholly decoupled from any tools which
> turbine might use.
>
> We have had a few discussions about this, in particular why
> some of the
> turbine interfaces don't extend Fulcrum interfaces or Torque
> interfaces for
> example. It basically boils down to not tying the development
> cycles of
> different projects together. Right now Turbine, Fulcrum and
> Torque are still
> more or less one project even though they exist in different
> repositories.
> But their development cycles may change entirely at some
> point. I'd like to
> try and keep any changes in base tools like Fulcrum from
> affecting Turbine
> application code. Daniel Rall asked for my reasons and I
> responded so I will
> try to dig that up and put it in an xdoc.
>
> The template interfaces and classes are particularly
> confusing because they
> are adaptered in two places. In Fulcrum itself the
> TemplateService uses a
> TemplateContext and each of the Template engines supported
> has an adapter to
> make its particular context class appear as a TemplateContext that the
> TemplateService understands and in Turbine we have our own
> TemplateContext
> and it is adapted so that the Fulcrum template service can
> deal with it.
>
> This appears redundant because the projects have just been
> severed so things
> definitely appear to be identical in places and they are. But
> this will not
> always be the case. I expect Fulcrum, Turbine and Torque to
> diverge and I
> hope to protect Turbine from this by defining an independent set of
> interfaces that Turbine application programmers can use.
>
> >
> > kind regards
> >
> > Dave Meaker
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> 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]
