Re: Survey for preparing FreeMarker development effort

Good thoughts!

On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Johno Crawford
<[email protected]>wrote:

>  Hi Daniel,
>
> I would like to see the following;
>
>    1. FreeMarker source moved to GitHub
>       - This would simplify the work involved for developers and
>       maintainers to manage contributions / bug fixes and issues.
>
> +1


>
>    -
>    1. Minimum JDK 5, or even 6 (which is now EOL)
>       - This would greatly reduce the complexity of the code, some parts
>       of the current code are riddled with JDK compat checks.
>       - Ability to use the concurrent package to improve performance!
>
> +1


>
>     1. Continue deploying artifacts to central Maven.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Johno
>
>
> On 10/03/2013 2:06 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> While I'm not one of the original authors of the 2.x.x (non-classic)
> line, seems I have gradually become the main maintainer of the
> FreeMarker template engine over the last few years or so, as the
> original authors (I mostly mean Jonathan and Attila) are inactive
> around here. Only I couldn't allocate enough time for this either, and
> this starts to become a problem for FreeMarker.
>
> So, to catch up, I plan to allocate serious amount of time [*] for
> FreeMarker development stating from late spring or early summer. The
> goal of this effort is fixing long-standing issues (mostly design
> issues that can be addressed without breaking backward compatibility
> too much), adding frequently requested missing features (an those that
> people don't request but I know they need it... :) ), increasing
> usability (better error messages, better documentation, terminology
> simplification) and to make FreeMarker more accessible for potential
> contributors (fixing the branching mess, switching to Maven, Git,
> modularization, addressing ownership/licensing and CLA issues).
>
> Thus, as the first step, I would like to hear about what the wishes of
> you as FreeMarker user are. What features you crave for the most, how
> could FreeMarker integrate better with your product, what are the
> things you or your fellow developers most often has problems with,
> etc. (Of course, I do have a long list of things to fix/improve, but I
> don't want to influence the discussion at this point.)
>
> *: How much time, you might ask. I'm thinking of a few hundred hours
>    here. Yeah, that's bold. What life will allow (work, family, etc.),
>    is another question. We will see.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
> tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> FreeMarker-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
>
>


-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
<http://twitter.com/#!/rotty3000> | Senior Software Architect | *Liferay,
Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>  <https://twitter.com/#!/liferay>

---

24-25 October 2012 |* Liferay **Spain Symposium* |
liferay.com/spain2012<http://www.liferay.com/spain2012>

16 November 2012 |* Liferay **Italy Symposium* |
liferay.com/italy2012<http://www.liferay.com/italy2012>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev

_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel