Roadmap?

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

Roadmap?

Daniel Dekany
Note to prevent confusion: the branch from with the ages-old 2.4
preview was released is now called 3.0.

Jonathan, what's going to happen with 3.0? Because when I will
maintain FM (even adding new features), I really won't enjoy
forward-porting into it. Even without that I have to port into 2
branches (2.3-GAE and 2.4), but those are at least very similar to
2.3.x, so that's less a PITA. Would I decide not to port into it,
that's like the death sentence for 3.0.

My down-to-the-earth road-map right now is that I push out 2.3.17
sometimes, which contains some bugfixes and new built-ins and other
minor features (also release 2.3.17-GAE on the same time), and then
that was the end of the 2.3.x line. Then I will remove some of the
3rd-party-library backward-compatibility baggage, also some of the
other BC baggage that doesn't affect much users, and make FM
GAE-compatible, and that will become 2.4.0. So 2.4.0 will be 99% BC
with 2.3.x, so for most users it will be just a drop-in jar
replacement.

Then come the things about which I'm not sure that they will happen
(because I'm not paid for it etc.), but they are the next most
realistic goals. So, "we" should try gradually add some *options* to
2.4.x, which will become the defaults starting from 2.5. These options
are:

- null-support (like in 3.0)
- Map support (means: keys can be non-string)
- A new wanna-be default object wrapper. This would get rid of all the
  SimpleXxx stuff, and more importantly, will not use
  HashTemplateModel. The FTL hash type should die out...
- Changing the default audience to computer (i.e. ${x} will behave as
  ${x?c}, and to achieve the old behavior ${x?h} has to be written).

Would the above be finished, some further important things are:
- Getting rid of the asymmetries between #functions and
  TemplateMethodModelEx-s, and between #macro-s and
  TemplateDirectiveModel-s. (Partially done in 3.0.)
- Proper "child-parent" communication (the one in 3.0 is not good yet)
- FTL-level support for writable maps and lists (sequences, that is)

Last but not least, FM desperately needs the "multiple named bodies"
aka "fragments" feature. This however is a heavier investment.

2.4 would also use new Ivy-based build system (as 3.0 does), Maven-ish
project layout (unlike 3.0 does) and would be a proper OSGi bundle (as
3.0 is).

--
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centralized Desktop Delivery: Dell and VMware Reference Architecture
Simplifying enterprise desktop deployment and management using
Dell EqualLogic storage and VMware View: A highly scalable, end-to-end
client virtualization framework. Read more!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/dell-eql-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roadmap?

Daniel Dekany
Thursday, November 11, 2010, 2:25:30 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:

[snip]
> Jonathan, what's going to happen with 3.0? Because when I will
> maintain FM (even adding new features), I really won't enjoy
> forward-porting into it. Even without that I have to port into 2
> branches (2.3-GAE and 2.4), but those are at least very similar to
> 2.3.x, so that's less a PITA. Would I decide not to port into it,
> that's like the death sentence for 3.0.
[snip]

Could we settle this? I have just committed a new feature into 2.3 +
2.3GAE + 2.4, but NOT into 3.0. But I don't want to do this behind
your back. It's just that if you (or anybody...) don't answer, then I
have to decide alone.

--
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500!
Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by
optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the
Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel