Right on! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Chmura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Velocity Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 6:48 PM Subject: RE: JavaCC open sourced on dev.java.net
>What event would be necessary in your view for a "need for future >development to manifest itself"? I do not honestly have the time to spend on this thread, but to answer your question I would have to develop a need personally with What I am using it for. Then I would have a need for further development. I think that there are three driving forces behind OSS, Ego, Hobbiests and People with a need. Heck the first two can even be combined most of the time. "We can make something better than product A". Since there is no money involved it's a case of showcasing ones skills, repect of their peers, etc, etc. Nobody out there decides - "Hey, there is a need to an alternative to X, I'll spend a hundred hours on it and donate it anonomyously". I don't think this is bad at all, its just the way humans are. When I write something I want people to see my name. (AARRRRGGGGG Outlook keeps capitalizing new lines for me - a new line is NOT the start of a new sentence - remind me to tell Microsoft). If I came up with a need and there was nothing out there I would develop it and move on. Yes, I can see that there would be problems getting it back into the main core, but oh well. I was involved with another project awhile back and development stymied. A bunch of people decided to fork off into their own group with the core and continue development. That was like someone taking the paddles and zapping a heart attack patient. ARRRRGGGGGGG Now I am writing long emails!!!!!! -----Original Message----- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Revusky Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: JavaCC open sourced on dev.java.net Bill Chmura wrote: > 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, Bill, Turbine didn't "screw" FreeMarker. The Turbine people screwed themselves. They went from a situation where their framework supported several different template engines to one where it only supported one. And the one that they retained support (Velocity) for is not even being actively developed and maintained! > 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. It's true that it's only very peripherally relevant. OTOH, no Velocity development is taking place, and that is the ostensible topic of this list. It could well be argued that, as things stand, this discussion of related tools in the space (that are being actively developed) is the closest thing possible to an on-top�c discussion -- until Velocity development resumes. Moreover, to be completely fair about this, the reason that this list is now dominated by the discussion you refer to is because it was pretty much completely dead before, so once somebody starts having a discussion about X, then discussion X dominates the list, since there is no other discussion. If somebody had started an OT discussion about Star Trek or Matrix or something, that discussion would dominate the list, since no discussion of Velocity development or anything else was taking place. All of that said, I personally am quite tired of the discussion. It was amusing for a while, but suddenly, I'm really just tired of it. > IMO this should have been on a freemarker list and the turbine list. Probably, but it so happened that the discussion developed here. > > 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. Well, over the last year in which no project development took place, there were plenty of feature requests, bug reports, etcetera. The feature requests were ignored or dismissed. The bug reports were not addressed. People even provided patches and the patches that were never reviewed. An examination of the archives of this mailing list bears this out. What event would be necessary in your view for a "need for future development to manifest itself"? Best Regards, Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker-Velocity comparison page, http://freemarker.org/fmVsVel.html FreeMarker 2.3pre4 is out! > > 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
