Re: Freemarkers production Status?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Freemarkers production Status?

Daniel Dekany
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 all".)

As of the project activity, FreeMarker is maintained for sure (2.3.x).
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 compatible
with 2.3. I'm quite certain that branch will go ahead if 3.0 will not.

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 FreeMarker
anyway.


Thursday, June 10, 2010, 8:56:26 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Message body follows:
>
> 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?
>
> --
> This message has been sent to you, a registered SourceForge.net user,
> by another site user, through the SourceForge.net site.  This message
> has been delivered to your SourceForge.net mail alias.  You may reply
> to this message using the "Reply" feature of your email client, or
> using the messaging facility of SourceForge.net at:
> https://sourceforge.net/sendmessage.php?touser=1286039
>
>

--
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Freemarkers production Status?

revusky
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.

http://freemarker.blogspot.com/2007/12/velocity-of-freemarker-looking-at-5.html

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 other
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 Velocity,
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 <[hidden email]> 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 all".)
>
> As of the project activity, FreeMarker is maintained for sure (2.3.x).
> 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 compatible
> 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 years
the other day. :-)

But, actually, in the context of this conversation, where the question
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 completely
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 helpful.

>
> 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 FreeMarker
> 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,
there would have had to be some kind of revolution, it seems. Very
unlikely. Now, as for people maybe dismissing my comments I am fully
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 grapes
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, [hidden email] wrote:
>
>> Message body follows:
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> --
>> This message has been sent to you, a registered SourceForge.net user,
>> by another site user, through the SourceForge.net site.  This message
>> has been delivered to your SourceForge.net mail alias.  You may reply
>> to this message using the "Reply" feature of your email client, or
>> using the messaging facility of SourceForge.net at:
>> https://sourceforge.net/sendmessage.php?touser=1286039
>>
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Daniel Dekany
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
> lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
> _______________________________________________
> FreeMarker-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Freemarkers production Status?

Daniel Dekany
Thursday, June 10, 2010, 11:16:59 PM, Jonathan Revusky wrote:

> 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.
>
> http://freemarker.blogspot.com/2007/12/velocity-of-freemarker-looking-at-5.html
>
> Unless something absolutely dramatic has happened since then in the
> Velocity camp of which I am unaware,

Now (I belive since 16 April 2010 as far as we only count stable
releases) they support macros with bodies, aka macros with nested
content. Although they are "unlucky" with the syntax... if they copy
WebMacro more closely back then, they would be more lucky now.
Because, you call macros in Velocity like #foo(), in which case no
corresponding #end is expected. So now to have a nested content, you
have to write #@foo()...#end (note the @).

[snip]
> 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.

Yeah, that's actually quite strange. I think it's really the shame of
the Java-world. Or templating is so unimportant... I don't know... but
it's certainly not *this* unimportant, is it?

--
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Freemarkers production Status?

Guo Du-3
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Daniel Dekany <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Yeah, that's actually quite strange. I think it's really the shame of
> the Java-world. Or templating is so unimportant... I don't know... but
> it's certainly not *this* unimportant, is it?
Your guys great work made this happens, it just works. Beside this,
there are other options for end user: jsp/dynamic
languages(grails)/client side template (ajax).

-Guo

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Freemarkers production Status?

Attila Szegedi-3
In reply to this post by Daniel Dekany
Well Andrew, it is reasonable to expect "active development" if the product is lacking in functionality. Velocity still has a lot of functionality where it can catch up to FreeMarker so I can imagine you'd want an "active development" feeling from the project if you chose it.

FreeMarker might not see much of coding activity lately, but OTOH it's quite stable and has more rounded out features for many years now.

Also, it's not completely inactive - I've been actively helping people who had troubles with running FreeMarker on Google App Engine just recently. It's far from being abandoned; I'd say it's being maintained.

Attila.

On 2010.06.10., at 22:35, Daniel Dekany 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 all".)
>
> As of the project activity, FreeMarker is maintained for sure (2.3.x).
> 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 compatible
> with 2.3. I'm quite certain that branch will go ahead if 3.0 will not.
>
> 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 FreeMarker
> anyway.
>
>
> Thursday, June 10, 2010, 8:56:26 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>
>> Message body follows:
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> --
>> This message has been sent to you, a registered SourceForge.net user,
>> by another site user, through the SourceForge.net site.  This message
>> has been delivered to your SourceForge.net mail alias.  You may reply
>> to this message using the "Reply" feature of your email client, or
>> using the messaging facility of SourceForge.net at:
>> https://sourceforge.net/sendmessage.php?touser=1286039
>>
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Daniel Dekany

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel