A question for those who have a good grasp of the current state of Pull
tools and Intake in the Turbinen project:
I've taken a look at the Scarab code, the documentation for the Pull tool
service, and the Intake tool service. It seems the use of the Intake tool
with actions and a request scope Pull tool (a la Scarab) is a clean way to
implement the MVC model.
However, I do have a few questions about this. The note at the top of the
Intake service page says that Intake "is currently beta quality software and
that it is still undergoing development and debugging." and "quite a few
bugs and modifications have been made to Intake since it was released with
2.1."
I'd prefer to stick with a stable version of Turbine/TDK (2.1). Does it make
sense for me to use the Intake tool implementation which comes with 2.1? Or
is it too buggy? If Intake in 2.1 has too many problems, does anyone know of
a clean way to implement the MVC model, using the Pull tool, *without* using
the Intake tool?
At this point it seems like my two options for Intake are:
- stable 2.1 Turbine with buggy Intake OR
- buggy Turbine CVS-HEAD with less buggy Intake
Is this true?
I'd like to have a working beta/prototype of the webapp I'm working on by
the end of August, so what's my best bet for getting started working on this
right away?
Thanks,
-F
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
