Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Templating Engine [Freemarker Reply]

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Maitland
    Hi, Bump for Stefan ... -- Andrew Maitland (LegacyKing) Admin Silverback - PCGen Board of Directors Data Chimp, Docs Tamarin Unique Title Quick-Silverback
    Message 1 of 24 , Jul 8, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      Bump for Stefan

      On 6/18/2010 1:52 PM, Andrew Maitland wrote:

      Looks like everyone is in agreement.

      Stefan - How do things look?

      On 6/15/2010 7:07 PM, Tom Parker wrote:
      For what it's worth, I'm good with the discussion so far and in using Freemarker.
      I also agree with James that we should use as much of the current OUTPUT token infrastructure as possible... both for past consistency, for testing, and for ensuring that the output system is detached from the PlayerCharacter object (or facade) [don't want tight core/output linkage]
      Tom Parker
      thpr@... and tppublic@...
      --- On Sun, 6/13/10, James Dempsey <jdempsey@...> wrote:
      From: James Dempsey <jdempsey@...>
      Subject: Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Templating Engine [Freemarker Reply]
      To: pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Sunday, June 13, 2010, 7:59 AM
      My concept of how this would work is quite different to
      Connor's one :)
      The aim would be to utilise the already built output system
      and add a 
      function that can be called from a template (output sheet)
      to allow the 
      existing output tags to be called. This would give us a
      change-over and use our existing well tested output code
      So for example we might have
      <@pcgen tag="NAME"/> or <@pcgen
      On 13/06/2010 9:45 PM Andrew Maitland wrote
      I'm not a developer or coder, so pardon my ignorance
      here, but what 
      exactly is this "Bean" property of which you speak?
      Onto the second part, are you suggesting that the
      Templating Engine 
      should be developed in tandem with the UI work then as
      opposed to 
      being tested against the trunk sandbox?
      I understand option #2 sounds like being in the UI dev
      sandbox would 
      be a better idea, but how would option #1 work, would
      we be able to 
      develop that in the Trunk?
      And playing the Kar devil's advocate, should we
      attempt to develop two 
      instances using the two methods outlined? I'd think
      since we have 
      limited Code Hours available, the best theory would be
      best to pursue 
      and focus solely on that.
      James - Oh, yeah, I got responses from all three
      developers, one 
      response had been diverted to the spam folder, in fact
      it was the 
      first reply within a few hours of my inquiry. They are
      definitely in 
      action and support mode.
      *From:* Connor Petty <mistercpp2000@...>
      *To:* pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
      *Sent:* Sun, June 13, 2010 1:19:34 AM
      *Subject:* Re: [pcgen_developers] Re: Templating
      Engine [Freemarker Reply]
      I agree. After looking through the all the javadocs
      and general 
      documentation for both freemarker and velocity,
      freemarker has a 
      larger feature set. I will say though that velocity's
      documentation is far more straight forward than
      documentation. So I guess I'll switch my vote to
      Freemarker instead :)
      While looking investigating both templating engines
      its come to my 
      attention that we would need to decide the best way to
      allow templates 
      to access the character internals. The two options are
      either 1. have 
      specific keys that a template would use to access
      aspects of a 
      character, "race", "alignment", etc.. or 2. use the
      character itself 
      and allow the template to retrieve bean properties
      from it.
      Given the complexity of character information that the
      templates will 
      probably deal with I'm thinking that option 2 would be
      better. If 
      that's the case then it looks like a use for the
      character facade. 
      There are two problems, first is that the character
      facade is still in 
      development and second is that the character facade is
      in the cdomui 
      branch. And it might be a little late to say this but
      I'm not so sure 
      that making a new sandbox based on the trunk is the
      best idea when 
      trying to develop use of a new templating engine,
      especially if it 
      might involve recreating something already in
      On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 11:42 PM, James Dempsey 
           I think it is pretty clear
      that FreeMarker has the better feature
           My concern was that if we
      encountered problems we would have hassles
           getting support. The very
      swift response to Andrew's query makes
           me much
           more confident that we have a
      support avenue if needed.
           So my vote is to go with the
      latest stable version of FreeMarker
           James Dempsey
           PCGen Code SB
           On 11/06/2010 9:13 AM Andrew
      Maitland wrote
           > Hi,
           > (I'm hoping others will
      chime in here)
           > Oh, and a quick
      correction, a portion of the email response is from
           > Daniel, the main reply
      was sent from Jonathan Revusky.
           > Based upon the fine
      reading a few points jump out at me that
           leads me
           > to change my stance and
      cast a vote for Freemarker:
           > Error Reporting (Error
      reporting is a MUST!)
           > Support for
      internationalization (A future aspect we are going for)
           > Faster Performance based
      upon comparisons (we like faster results)
           > I'd encourage people to
      check the blog as it's more detailed.
           > On 6/10/2010 2:23 PM,
      Andrew Maitland wrote:
           >> Hi Folks,
           >> I got a reply from
      the Freemarker Admin - Daniel Dekany
           >> BEGIN FWD:
           >> A couple of years
      ago, I wrote a response to a javaworld
           article that
           >> had made a
      ridiculously superficial comparison between
           FreeMarker and
           >> Velocity and put it
      on our group blog.
           >> Unless something
      absolutely dramatic has happened since then in the
           >> Velocity camp of
      which I am unaware, I don't think there is
           hardly any
           >> reasonable FreeMarker
      versus Velocity debate to be had. If you
           just do
           >> some research using
      google, in particular blog entries and
           such, you
           >> will see that there
      has been (and I think there continues to
           be) quite
           >> a bit of migration
      from Velocity to FreeMarker and none in the
           >> direction. Even OSS
      projects that are under the Apache
           umbrella, such
           >> as Struts 2 and
      OfBiz, tend to use FreeMarker in preference to
           >> Velocity. (What does
      that tell you?)
           >> What I am kind of
      surprised about is that after all these
           years, that
           >> these are still
      considered to be the two main contenders out there.
           >> But, if the
      discussion is being framed as FreeMarker versus
           >> I don't think there
      is much of a discussion to be had. I
           honestly do
           >> not believe that
      anybody has done a halfway diligent comparison and
           >> decided that Velocity
      was the right choice.
           >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010
      at 10:35 PM, Daniel Dekany
      <mailto:ddekany%40freemail.hu>> wrote:
           >> > This is not
      (only) my duty to answer, so I forward the
           question to the
           >> > developer list.
      I hope it's not a problem. (So whoever
           answers, use
           >> > "reply to
           >> >
           >> > As of the
      project activity, FreeMarker is maintained for sure
           >> > OTOH it has a
      working yet uncompleted 3.0 version in the
           trunk whose
           >> > development
      stalled since a good while, and I can't tell if
           when it
           >> > will move again.
      There is also a 2.4 branch now (mostly due
           to changes
           >> > needed for GAE
      compatibility), which is much more backward
           >> > with 2.3. I'm
      quite certain that branch will go ahead if 3.0
           will not.
           >> I am actually
      becoming more or less confident that 3.0 will go
           >> forward. I committed
      some code for the first time in a nearly 2
           >> the other day. :-)
           >> But, actually, in the
      context of this conversation, where the
           >> is being framed as
      FreeMarker versus Velocity, I think it hardly
           >> matters. I am pretty
      certain that the better choice would be
           >> FreeMarker even under
      the worst case scenario that no further
           >> development ever
      occurs on *any* version of FreeMarker. People
           can see
           >> my obvious biases and
      take them into account, but it is my
           >> honest view that
      going with Velocity is a decision that you
           would live
           >> to regret. Aside from
      the fact that it is underpowered and
           >> underfeatured (unless
      something really dramatic has happened in the
           >> last few years, and
      if so, correct me) but even besides that, the
           >> features it does have
      are implemented in a very sloppy, careless
           >> manner that is pretty
      much bound to drive you crazy unless you are
           >> only using it in the
      most trivial kind of way. Just look at some of
           >> the blog entries I
      cite in the above-linked article.
           >> I hope that's
           >> >
           >> > As of which
      project to use, first of all you should consider
           where the
           >> > two projects
      stand right now. Then you can guess how many active
           >> > development
      Velocity needs to achieve the feature set or
           stability of
           >> > FreeMarker, or
      if how much will it follow the direction of
           >> > anyway.
           >> Is there any serious
      development on Velocity? I haven't looked
           at it
           >> for at least a couple
      of years, but just observing the culture
           >> there would have had
      to be some kind of revolution, it seems. Very
           >> unlikely. Now, as for
      people maybe dismissing my comments I am
           >> aware that some
      people think it is so terribly wrong for me to
           bash a
           >> competing product,
      and will dismiss my comments as being sour
           >> or whatever. But, you
      can look into the issue. I think that if
           you do,
           >> you'll basically just
      end up seeing that I'm just telling the
           truth. I
           >> really would prefer
      for Velocity to be a serious competing product
           >> that is worthy of
      respect. But... it is not... :-(
           >> JR
           >> >
           >> >
           >> > Thursday, June
      10, 2010, 8:56:26 PM,
           >> >
           >> >> Message body
           >> >>
           >> >> Hi,
           >> >>
           >> >> My name is
      Andrew, I'm with the PCGen Project. We are
           >> >> looking at
      Velocity and Freemarker to see which Template
           >> >> Engine would
      support our needs. However, the majority want
           >> >> to go with
      an active development, and it seems Freemarker
           >> >> has stopped
      major development. Do you have any plans to get
           >> >> more active
      in the near future or should we use Velocity?
           >> >>
           >> >> --
           >> >>
           >> >>
           >> >
           >> > --
           >> > Best regards,
           >> > Daniel Dekany
           >> >
           >> >
           >> > FreeMarker-devel
      mailing list
           >> > FreeMarker-devel@...
           >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
           >> >
           >> --
           >> Andrew Maitland
           >> Admin Silverback -
      PCGen Board of Directors
           >> Data Chimp, Docs
           >> Unique Title
      "Quick-Silverback Tracker Monkey"
           >> Unique Title "The
      Torturer of PCGen"
           >> On 6/10/2010 12:06
      PM, Andrew Maitland wrote:
           >>> Hi,
           >>> I just checked
      out Freemarker SF site... they have activity, but
           >>> from what I've
      sampled it's only support for the eclipse
           plugin, no
           >>> core work is
      being done.
           >>> I've sent a
      message to all three developers and hopefully I'll
           >>> at least a reply
      from one of them soon.
           >>> I've almost
      finished porting Code over (Doing it piece meal is a
           >>> LONG process...
      and even then I'm exceeding the message size :( )
           >>> On 6/10/2010 8:49
      AM, Andrew Maitland wrote:
           >>>> Hi,
           >>>> I've gotten
      the sandbox set up; I think Stefan decided to go
           >>>> the active
      Velocity. I can email the Freemarker guys to see
           what is
           >>>> up, but the
      lack of activity on the main page would indicate
           to me
           >>>> that nothing
      new has happened in a long while.
           >>>> On 6/8/2010
      2:09 AM, karianna03 wrote:
      Freemarker was in an interesting state last time I checked
           with them, the 3 core
      committers were somewhat at odds with
           eachother about the direction
      Freemarker should go in, I'm not
           sure if that's been resolved.
           >>>>> Stefan
      should probably contact them directly again.
           >>>>> K
           >>>>> --- In pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
      Connor Petty
      Actually from what I can tell Freemarker is still active,
           their sourceforge
           >>>>>> page
      shows commits from only 15 hours ago.
           >>>>>> On
      Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Andrew Maitland
           <drew0500@...> wrote:
      Yup, it's claim is that it's an improvement over
           Freemarker and
      incorporating Freemarker and Velocity stuff.
      Freemarker has also been out of activity for quite a bit.
           Which means we
      should likely go with Velocity. The plugins seem very
           nice... one that let's
      you preview the output sounds really neat.
      On 6/7/2010 3:02 PM, James Dempsey wrote:
           >>>>>>> I
      think we can discount that one the last activity was in
           October 2008.
      James Dempsey
      PCGen Code SB
      On 8 June 2010 03:23, Andrew Maitland <drew0500@...>
         >>>>>>>> And just
      to throw a wrench into the works...
         >>>>>>>> http://code.google.com/p/zipscript/
         >>>>>>>> Cheers,
         >>>>>>>> --
         >>>>>>>> Andrew
         >>>>>>>> *From:*
      Andrew Maitland <drew0500@...>
         >>>>>>>> *To:*
      PCGen Developers <pcgen_developers@yahoogroups.com
         >>>>>>>> *Sent:*
      Mon, June 7, 2010 10:14:08 AM
      *Subject:* [pcgen_developers] Templating Engine
         >>>>>>>> Hi
         >>>>>>>> I'd like
      to jumpstart the discussion for a Templating
           Engine. Our two
         >>>>>>>> choices
      are Freemarker and Velocity. Stefan is taking a
           look at both
         >>>>>>>> engines,
      but the general feeling is we should go with the
           one that has
         >>>>>>>> active
      development - which is Velocity. Velocity has a
           nice list of editor
         >>>>>>>> plugins
      to support it as well :)
         >>>>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/velocity/VelocityEditors
         >>>>>>>> Of Note
      this has support for Eclipse Plugins, and
           IntelliJ IDEA two of our
         >>>>>>>> more
      common IDEs on the Code Team.
      Freemarker - http://freemarker.org/
         >>>>>>>> and a
      list of editors (which has the same support, plus
           some like
         >>>>>>>> http://freemarker.org/editors.html
         >>>>>>>> This is
      of benefit for the OS Team which does require
           Code Man Hours to
         >>>>>>>> Why is
      this important -
         >>>>>>>> #1 - It
      works towards reducing the number of CSHEETs we
           need to implement
         >>>>>>>> a simple
      Color Scheme
         >>>>>>>> #2 - It
      allows us a greater ability to customize the
           Character Sheets
         >>>>>>>> without
      requiring the people to be fo, xml and xslt

      (Message over 64 KB, truncated)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.