Martin Poeschl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>the coupled versions of torque and fulcrum (service stuff) are not maintained any
>longer.
>we told the users to use the decoupled versions ... good idea, but it doesn't work :-(
>many people waste there time trying to make them work together, so i propose to kill
>the coupled
>versions and use the decoupled for turbine 2.x
>we could release turbine 2.2 including the coupled versions and kill them for 2.3
Hi Martin,
well, actually, the Turbine 2.2 tree over here in my CVS (and used in
our development) is exactly this.
Problems that you will find (and that I found):
You still have to keep lots of services, simply because they don't
exist in Fulcrum: castor, freemarker und webmacro are the simplest
examples. If you pull them simple because they're old, this means that
people using these are left behind.
You will find out (just as I found out) that the template service, the
pull service and the velocity service are entwined in the innards of
the core Turbine 2 (Or maybe I was just too dumb to do it? Could
be. :-) ). If you try to pull them out and replace them by fulcrum,
you end up with something similar Turbine 3. If you replace the
velocity, webmacro and freemarker services by Fulcrum template
service, you end up with people not using it, because their
applications don't use velocity.
You will annoy the living daylights out of current Turbine users,
which start with Turbine/TDK 2.1 (still the only official release),
stumble through the myriads of changes since then (Try to compare
Turbine 2.1 with the current Turbine 2.2b/Fulcrum/Torque/Maven system,
heavily relying on other Projects like Commons and you see that these
are almost two completely different things), try to make sense and end
up with an inferior system simply because they will give up in
frustration.
I remember how long to took me to understand, that there is a
difference between an screen and the template for a screen, simply
because in earlier times people used actual Java classes to render a
screen instead of using a template. The horrors of
System.out.println("<HTML>\n<HEAD>\"); ... :-)
Quick, can you explain to a newbie struggling with Turbine the
difference between screen.homepage and template.homepage in
Turbine.properties? And why the CVS checked-in default of "/Index.vm"
leads to an annoying mess if you change (at a total different location
in the TR.properties) from FileResourceLoader to JarResourceLoader?
(been there, done that. :-( ). And when is screen.homepage used and
when is template.homepage used? :-)
I personally would go for a stable release of T2.2 and then putting it
into bugfix only mode after that and put all new efforts into T3
instead of making T2 something that resembles T3 but keeps all the
ugly traits. T3 is in many aspects much cleaner (because it sheds all
the older stuff from T2) and should be promoted instead of dragging T2
along.
For me (and this means, for this company :-) ), T2.2 will definitely
the final T2 release that we use. If there will ever be a T2.2
release. T3 is coming along nicely and if I really put more work into
the Turbine core, it will into T3 once its innards will be better
documented.
Regards
Henning
P.S.: Oh, and a working TDK, of course. My TDK (I have some hacked up
for inhouse use based on Maven) has some dozen K difference to the
"official" CVS TDK, which does not work with T2 at all. :-( Anyone
wants to have them for integrating?
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am Schwabachgrund 22 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
