I'm +1 for the move, I will upgrade sooner or later and I believe the
multiple instance feature is required by some people. The few tests
and comments showed that it should be no pains for using it (besides
the few that are using the Runtime directly...).
Cheers,
:) Christoph
"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote:
>
> There has been a version of Velocity, src and jar, in whiteboard/geir
> for 2 weeks now that is an approach to providing the 'separate instance'
> functionality that people have been asking for. There have been a few
> users that have tested it with positive feedback, and I think that there
> is no downside to this approach - it should be just as fast (or faster -
> I found a bug I fixed :) than the current post 1.1 codebase.
>
> What this does is allow you to avoid the singleton model of Velocity,
> and create separate, independant new instances of Velocity :
>
> VelocityEngine ve = new VelocityEngine();
>
> I would like to check this in, as moving forward with anything else is
> somewhat painful for me as I must update both in my separate instance
> source tree, as well as my 'HEAD' source tree.
>
> There are still three outstanding issues that I will take care of, 1 the
> bug reported by VM_INLINE_LOCAL bug reported by Dan, the implied init(),
> and what appears to be a logger issue, reported by Piero.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> geir
