Friday, June 13, 2003, 10:04:46 PM, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>last year or so. We are now in our 4th major release cycle of the last >>16 months, and each such cycle has added major new features. Come to >>think of it, I wonder: what was the last significant feature added to >>Velocity and when was it added? > > Can you tell me, what the "significant features" were, that you've added.
Well, he has contribute to FreeMarker instead (and later become to the lead developer). Also me. You know, I rather choose the project were efforts results in improvements. I don't think there is anything bad with it. Everybody chooses what OS project that he wants to support with hies efforts, and then independently of this, as a matter of fact, Velocity is frozen. It's does not make sense to hit back with the question above. > One of the biggest advantages of Velocity is the fact that it gets its > job well done and doesn't try to be "more" than a template language. > > While I'm still a little unhappy with some decisions regarding numbers > and arithmetics, I do must admit that this self-reluctance from the > developers really helped to clearly distinguish with what should be > done on the vm pages (view) and what should be done in java code > (model). > > As Turbine is one of the major users of Velocity (and we just dropped > FreeMarker out... ;-) ), I'm really interested where you think that > Freemarker is superior to Velocity. Visit the "Features" page of FM or the FM vs Vel. comparison page... you can say that you don't like the approach of FreeMarker, or that this and that was a bad design decision, but otherwise you *will* find a lot of points where FM is better than Vel. > Maybe we pull FM back in for 2.4-dev... :-) The ":-)" indicates that this can be only a joke? -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
