on 6/16/01 3:57 PM, "Jeff Schnitzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A short comparison to Turbine is probably obligitory: Maverick is a
> minimalist framework; it focuses specifically on MVC flow and provides
> no code for connection pooling, logging, OR mapping, etc. Our feeling
> is that those features are already implemented reasonably well by
> application servers and other existing tools. This makes Maverick much
> simpler and easier to learn, at the risk of not being "everything you
> need". Another key differentiating factor is Maverick's comprehensive
> support for XSLT.
Actually, Maverick doesn't compare with Turbine at all because it is simply
a publishing framework and is lacking the webapp aspects that Turbine has.
The other thing is that if you are using just Tomcat, it is missing quite a
few of the "features" that you claim other app servers have and should
provide.
If anything you should compare Maverick with Cocoon.
:-)
-jon
--
"Open source is not available to commercial companies."
-Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft
<http://www.suntimes.com/output/tech/cst-fin-micro01.html>
