Rodney Schneider wrote:
Yeah, the Intake docs need a lot of work, but once you get used to Intake it works quite well and does save quite a bit of development work.
The docs are only half the problem: if anything is set up at all wrong you get a null pointer exception; the property names you specify in your inteke.xml get capitalised (i.e. if you have <field name="someName" ... you have to refer to it as SomeName or you get exceptions); IntakeTool.get() is declared 'throws Exception' so you have to wrap calls to it, although it only throws TurbineException -- and when it does so, e.g. due to a typo in a template, the log just tells you that a TurbineException was thrown, without the exception message, so you have no idea why... And that's just what I ran into in one evening! :-)
I like what Intake provides, I just think it could be a lot easier to setup and use. That exception from IntakeTool.get() is a real killer.
Also, someone needs to backport the fixes that have been made to the Fulcrum version of Intake to Turbine 2.x. I have been meaning to do this for a while, but haven't found the time.
Wouldn't it make more sense for Turbine just to switch to the Fulcrum version, if that's being actively developed? I thought Turbine was migrating to decoupled services in general. Or was that just for Torque?
L.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
