DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4321>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4321 Why is Context orthogonal to the Collections API Summary: Why is Context orthogonal to the Collections API Product: Velocity Version: 1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Enhancement Priority: Other Component: Build AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a set of mappings that I loaded into a java.util.Properties object that I need to use in my template rendering. For some reason you have this Context interface which is little more than a renamed java.util.Map. Why do you have your own separate implementations for what should just be standard collections classes? In order to make those properties available, I end up having to create a context and copy the settings from the Properties object one, by, one. Why not just use Map instead of Context?
