On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Justin Wells wrote:
> A lot of projects have been thrown into turmoil by this. People are not
> sure what is going to happen, and that uncertainty breeds a migration
> to JSP, commercial software, and more "proof" that opensource software
> can't be trusted.
I see no reason for turmoil, and I don't think that is the case.
For Turbine users two things have happened: first you changed the license
which is probably acceptable to most of the Turbine developers. That is
a great thing! And we all thank you for that, you've made a lot
of people happy. Second there is now another option which is Velocity.
Just as there are many implementations of JSP, C, C++, Java and
every other language that exists, so are there now of WebMacro.
I don't think that is a bad thing. Competition and diversity
of development will only lead to the extinction of bad code
and the survival of better code. I am the first to concede
when my collegues spot bad design, or the profiler tells
me my code belongs in the toilet. People have already spotted
problems with Velocity, but that's why I chose to place it
in public view before it is ready for prime time. To
spot these things and add some diversity of thought
to the code base.
In terms of WebMacro users, I think Velocity is a benefit
as well. We have full intentions of trying to make Velocity
a 100% drop in replacement for WebMacro. Even if I have
to change the parser a bit. But your users still have
a choice! They don't have to switch if they are happy
where they are, or if they find Velocity not to their
liking. If the syntax and plug points, as you call them,
are the same then nothing is going to hurt your users.
Your reasoning that this will fracture the community
I believe to be flawed. The users will not suffer if
we share a common API. The Velocity team has the full
intention of making the use of Velocity as easy as
possible for existing WebMacro users.
But when it comes to developers Velocity already has
five developers on the contributors page, three of
whom have already made significant contributions days
after the initial announcment. And we expect a sixth
shortly. And he is the author of iSpock, another
competitor to WebMacro. And it is almost certain that
this number will grow. Why? With the backing of the Jakarta
project it is an attractive project to work for:
good developers, fast mailing lists, view of cvs
modifications via mail, the documentation is
growing very rapidly and the potential user base
is enormous.
And I would certainly like to make it clear that
you are 100% welcome to join the project. And I
am 100% interested in using parts of WebMacro in
Velocity. But I can't even look at your code
until someone at the ASF gives me the green light?
I'm not interested in licensing debates, I just
really don't care. For me it's the APL or bust.
The second that you fully APL your code, or
the second someone at the ASF says it's ok
I can then look at your code, we can work together
and make something awesome! There are already
things that you've implemented that I would like
to use, but the fact is that I can't right now.
You can't convince me that the SPL, or a slightly
modified APL will not cause problems down the
road. I am not willing to take that chance, you
nor anyone else will be able to persuade me
otherwise. If your users have asked for the
Apache License then you should do as they have
asked. Let we can go somewhere together.
For me this project is all about doing something
that is neat and useful. It has been a great source
of enjoyment for me over the last few weeks to
make Velocity. I certainly had no intention of
starting this grand debate. I wanted to have some
fun and I did. I thought about it for quite a while
before I coded a thing, I had no idea it would
progress as quickly as it did. But it has and this
is where we are now.
Jon saw what I was doing, and offered me a
great opportunity to be a part of the
Jakarta project. Who wouldn't want to be a
part of the Jakarta project? I myself am
grateful for the opportunity to provide something
useful, I have no intention of stopping what
I'm doing. And the group of Velocity fully intend
to make stable, robust and zippy implementation.
By my last measurement Velocity was slightly faster
then your last snapshot. But when I am finished
implementing the "Injectors" in Velocity then
we will let the profiler/JMeter decide. I am a bit of
a performance junkie, but I fully realize the
quality of the code is just as important and
that's why I'm lucky that there are other great
developer on the team! (For anyone interested
in the design of Velocity, I will be posting an
extensive document on Wednesday night. The idea
of an Injector will be explained in detail).
That's about all I have to say on the subject.
You are welcome here anytime!
jvz.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
