Jürgen, the hero of the day! Your mail touched the heart of my fellow developer and it now seems as if we are going to use turbine. I would really appreciate the documents on how to use M2. /Ludwig
-----Original Message----- From: Jürgen Hoffmann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: den 5 november 2009 20:55 To: Turbine Users List Subject: Re: What is the state of turbine? Hi Ludwig, I did not say that there is nobody working on turbine. You just have to understand that the turbine 2.3.3 release is pretty stable as it is right now. It provides tools for everything you need in web applications. Even JSON Integration. M.E.T.A. is some years old. It was developed by Henning Schmiedehausen who is now the Velocity PMC Chair. Turbine has evolved many projects like maven and torque themselves. That said, there has been a lot of development inside of turbine over the past years. Even a little too much. That said, the core developers are currently working on straightening up TRUNK. fulcrum provides components which once coupled in turbine are now decoupled of it. If you have ever tried to decouple something yourself, you should agree, that this can be tedious work. Siegfried and Thomas are doing a wonderful job on doing just that. They are moving the build process over to a m2 build system as well. And to be honest, I asked the same question you asked a couple of years ago http://markmail.org/thread/xaxk2fssigffu3ji As you can see now is 2009 and you can still get support. Turbine 2.3.3 is well tested. There should be no problems inside the framework when you use it. If you need m2, I can provide you with docs on how to set it up. Other than that, I have been using turbine for years, and it has never let me down, and there have not been things, i wasn't able to do with turbine. Kind regards Juergen Hoffmann Am 05.11.2009 um 19:53 schrieb Ludwig Magnusson: > Let me reply to both Sheldon and Jürgen. > The main concern of my team is that the project will close down. > What will > happened then? What if other frameworks develop interesting features > and > turbine stays behind? > > Jürgen: > I defenetly respect that people has other priorities and I most > certaly do > not require anyone to put any time into this. But if the situation > is as it > is, then I wonder if a few people busy at work and engaged in other > projects > are enough to carry an open source framework like turbine. I really > have no > idea what it takes. > > Sheldon: > I also believe that turbine is stalbe and robust if you have an > application > running it. But there is actually a lot of bugs connected to M.E.T.A > and the > setting up of a new project. > Perhaps this is a thing that blocks new users? > /Ludwig > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sheldon Ross [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: den 5 november 2009 19:33 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: What is the state of turbine? > > > I have used both Struts and Turbine, but for the couple production > sites we > run I use Turbine. > I've never really like the Bean/JSP approach Struts uses. Not a big > fan of > php either. > Once you understand exactly how Turbine works, it's extremely easy > to do > whatever you want with it. > > Maybe its just me, but Turbine does everything I need and has for > awhile. > Maybe that contributes to why this list is quiet. > > Just my ancedotal 2 cents, > > Sheldon Ross > >> Subject: Re: What is the state of turbine? >> From: [email protected] >> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 17:17:25 +0100 >> To: [email protected] >> >> Hi Ludwig, >> >> we have setup turbine to be built by m2. Turbine is not dead. Only >> the >> people developing on it, are either busy at their work, or involved >> into further uncouling of the core serivces inside the fulcrum >> project >> (Thomas Vandahl) >> >> If you need support getting your app running and other things like >> build your app using m2, I can really help you. >> >> Although there are only few active developers, the few know turbine >> to >> its bones. So just ask >> >> Kind regards >> >> Juergen >> >> Am 05.11.2009 um 11:37 schrieb Ludwig Magnusson: >> >>> Hello! >>> >>> I am currently working in a big web application project with a few >>> fellow >>> developers. When we started out we were discussing a lot on which >>> framework >>> to use. I was familiar with turbine and I liked it very much. >>> However the >>> others were skeptical since there is very few persons involved in >>> turbine at >>> the moment. We decided to work with php and Zend and we have made a >>> quite >>> cool alpha version of out app. However, me and the other main >>> developer >>> (both computer engineers) have realized that the php community does >>> not have >>> very good understanding of concepts as best practices when it >>> comes to >>> object orienting, testing, database management and so on. Especially >>> for >>> complex applications. We are now considering switching framework and >>> we are >>> looking at java-based frameworks. (Because java rules) >>> >>> >>> >>> We have looked at other apache frameworks such as tapestry and >>> struts (which >>> are much more active). But to me it seems as if they do not address >>> the >>> things that I really like about turbine and that I feel are basic in >>> the >>> kind of application we are developing. For instance no other >>> framework seems >>> to have a user class (or interface) which I think is a basic feature >>> since >>> validations on the user are done on almost every page. Further on, >>> if there >>> is some kind of permission system, it is always role-based and not >>> group-role-based which we need. >>> >>> >>> >>> So my question is.. Is turbine dying? Or is it already dead? And >>> why? >>> >>> I am not _that_ experienced in developing complex web applications. >>> Does >>> turbine have some kind of major flaw that I don't see? >>> >>> >>> >>> What I like and what I am looking for is this: >>> >>> - The security system - group-role-based >>> >>> - Tight integration with velocity (which of course can be >>> accomplished in other frameworks as struts). And what I like with >>> velocity >>> is that the templates looks very much like static html, i.e. they >>> are very >>> readable. I don't like jsp. >>> >>> - The torque object model that is generated >>> >>> - A clear file structure for the environment. (What I >>> like in >>> turbine is that I can create a folder for x number of pages and then >>> create >>> a default.java class in the corresponding package and have the same >>> permission check for all those pages) >>> >>> >>> >>> The biggest flaw I think turbine has is that it isn't really maven 2 >>> compatible. I really like working with maven, but I prefer not to >>> use >>> version 1. >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm just sending this since I think it's sad that it is not used >>> anymore and >>> I wonder why. >>> >>> Any reply/discussion would be appreciated. >>> >>> /Ludwig >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. > http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MFESRP&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_ > MFESRP_Local_MapsMenu_Resturants_1x1 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
