velocity-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Dekany <ddek...@freemail.hu>
Subject Re: [ANN] Viento - WHY?
Date Thu, 06 Oct 2005 15:20:20 GMT
Thursday, October 6, 2005, 1:31:47 PM, Steve O'Hara wrote:

>
> Am I missing something here......??
>
> There seems to be a whole load of template laguages springing up all
> over the place that look very similar to Velocity, each claiming it
> solves a view problem that Velocity doesn't.  
>
> I've always assumed that Velocity is a "work in progress" and
> contributions from programmers that improve it are always welcome. So
> why aren't these FreeMarker/Viento/TomDick&Harry developers contributing
> to Velocity rather than creating yet another clone?

For example because you usually can't add new features without upset the
original approach of the existing template engine, and without doing lot
of non-BC things. That's the way of evolution... sometimes it needs
revolutoins. Complete rewrites, that is.

Another reason is usually that the core developers of a given template
engine usually don't agree with too revolutionary ideas, or at least you
have to debate with them a lot until they get what you are talking
about. It's tiresome... also maybe neither party is right, just the have
different taste. So people rather go and work out his own ideas alone,
where they don't have to fight to be understood. This is also very valid
reason.

As of FreeMarker, AFAIK it was written earlier than Velocity... So why
aren't these Velocity developers rather contribute to FreeMarker, rather
than creating yet another one. ;) Just kidding of course...

> I don't have any axe to grind either way but it seems a little odd to
> keep developing new code bases for essentailly the same thing.

It's not at all. The same thing can be solved in a lot of ways, and
neither is clearly the best, except for very trivial tasks (and template
engine design is very very far from trivial). Also, if a solution
exists, experiences accumulate, and thus naturally people will have
better ideas.

> I'm all for step changed developments, but as far as I can make out,
> most of these other tools are just slight improvements on the
> original.

Well... I can't resist to note that you say this on a the wrong list. At
I least I guess that if somebody's, then it's ASF's passion to recreate
already existing projects, mostly just so there will be an in-house
solution (not-invented-here policy). I.e. not because they feel they
have some new ideas and want to scratch the itch.

***
WARNING: I do NOT meant to say opinion about this policy here, if it's
bad or good. That is, now don't start kicking me on balls again! :)
***

Like, Velocity is maybe a good example of this (with the WebMacro fuss).
Or, Geronimo recently. You could ask: why they didn't contribute to
JBoss or ObjectWeb's Jonas? Wait, I know! They wanted a J2EE
implementation by which users can "win a 42'' Plasma HDTV or Sony(tm)
PSP"? :) Ehhh, sorry, I have found it so funny... go to sf.net and see
if you don't understand.

> Can anyone enlighten me?
>
> Steve

-- 
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: velocity-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: velocity-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message