I have got to second this.   

Of all the traffic on this list in the past week 40% of it was how much
better freemarker is than velocity, 40% about how turbine screwed
Freemarker, 10% about how FreeMarker does not want to any work to get
added back into Turbine, 5% about how Velocity will start getting its
act together and a message about using struts with velocity.

IMO this should have been on a freemarker list and the turbine list.

One other note I saw glancing through the various emails was, and I
don't know who, "all the original developers of velocity have abandoned
the project".  This is cool, and I think it is a necessary evolution of
an opensource project.  People have a need, develop something and give
it out.  When their need is satisfied they move on and other developers
take over.  Project development continues as the need manifests itself.

Just my opinion

-----Original Message-----
From: Eelco Hillenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:50 AM
To: Velocity Developers List
Subject: Re: JavaCC open sourced on dev.java.net


Maybe this is a subject to start a new list on. It's really not the kind
of discussions I joined this list for.

Eelco

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: JavaCC open sourced on dev.java.net


> Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> > Daniel Dekany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> >>Tuesday, June 17, 2003, 2:07:54 AM, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>either naive or intentionally distorts facts. The reason is that 
> >>Jakarta projects tend to use other Jakarta projects, for strategic 
> >>reasons.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > "You have a serious ego problem." http://us.imdb.com/Title?0118883
>
> Henning, have you heard of the "ad-hominem" fallacy?
>
> That's where you make a personal attack on somebody else's character 
> because you can't deal with what they're saying via legitimate debate.
>
> I infer from the ancient Greek origin of the term that this particular

> ploy was already well known and dissected a loooong time ago.
>
> So, it's really really oooold. You really ought to try to do a bit 
> better than this. Try to maintain a higher standard of discourse, 
> because this kind of thing reflects poorly on your work. People will 
> likely draw negative inferences. (I already have, for example.)
>
> Regards,
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ 
> FreeMarker-Velocity comparison page, 
> http://freemarker.org/fmVsVel.html
> FreeMarker 2.3pre4 is out!
>
>
> >
> > Regards
> > Henning
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to