Sure, I agree that what you don't want is a storm of commits of varying quality to maintain. I just thought this one is quite common asked for, and thought that, even if it is not included in the tools project, it would be nice for future Velocity users to be able to find a complete implementation in the mailing archive... If only those attachents would work!
I'll try bugzilla later on today to get the source posted. B.t.w. I could not find the contribution of 'Moshe' you Nathan Bubna mentioned. Eelco ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Bubna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Velocity Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 3:27 AM Subject: velocity-tools goal/scope Was: Re: String resource loader > Eelco Hillenius said: > > For a project that I am doing I need the ability to construct Templates from > > plain Strings. > ... > > there does seem to be interest in this sorta thing lately... > > > Attached you find what I came up with. It would be great if you guys could > > give it a place in the project (or probably better the tools subproject). > > hmm. so far, the tools subproject has been heavily aimed at web-dev support and > so called "view tools" (objects placed in the context to perform/simplify > various tasks at that level). inclusion of such things as alternate resource > loaders, "custom" directives and the like has not really been discussed (at > least, not since i came on board). however, i've begun to think lately that > this warrants some discussion. after all, things like a StringResourceLoader or > a Define directive certainly are "velocity tools" in the general sense of the > word. > > personally, i'm a little wary of this. if these are things people *use* (not > just want!), but don't fit and get into velocity's core, then it would be nice > to have a place for them to be tested and developed. however, as the scope of > the project widens, it becomes all that much harder for the committers (just me > lately) to follow and maintain. for instance, in my work, i presently have no > use for a StringResourceLoader, nor do i anticipate any. > > so, my general inclination is not to commit these things for others unless i'm > sure there is sufficient demand for them to ensure that there will be > contributers to support them. > > what impressions of and desires for the goals of the velocity-tools project do > you (whoever reads this) have? do you think it ought include these sort of > "tools"? should the project have set, specific goals? what should those be? > or do you see it as a place to collect all sorts of velocity tools/extras/utils? > > and specifically, i suppose i should ask who out there will use and/or support a > StringResourceLoader? and with that, do you prefer Eelco's implementation (when > it gets posted :) or the one Moshe posted to the user list? > > what about Andrew's #define directive? (also posted/dicussed on the user list) > would/does anyone else use or support that? > > just curious, no promises right now. :-) these things are unlikely to get in > until we get a velocity-tools release out. > > Nathan Bubna > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
