on 7/3/2000 4:19 PM, "george stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Geez, jon, it's not that I want to divorce myself from
> the group. I've learned a lot from you and the other
> Turbine users. I hope that some Turbine users will
> help me with OPL
>
> It's that OPL will be more useful to more people as a
> standalone package. It's a case of less is more. I
> wouldn't think of starting a servlet engine as a
> subproject of an O-R mapping engine.
This is something I never understood the mentality of.
For example, what harm is in just putting turbine.jar into the classpath and
using just the database pool stuff? If the database pool stuff is documented
and easy to setup and use (which it is), then there is no harm in only using
that portion of the Turbine framework. The same could be said of OPL. The
benefit of having that stuff combined into turbine.jar is that when you do
need say a ParameterParser or OPL, all you need to do is simply start using
it. No more including yet even more .jar files.
Anyway...this is all silly semantics...
Now that you have the SF site, could you please remove the OPaL stuff from
turbine so that there isn't any confusion?
thanks,
-jon
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
