Re: [Freemarker-devel] Attila, do you want me to connect you with Google for GAE support?

Thursday, February 4, 2010, 5:59:40 PM, Attila Szegedi wrote:

> I think I already expressed in an earlier e-mail that I think this
> would be a viable direction

Yes, you did.

> (except I was thinking 2.5 instead of 3.0)

Considering the massive non-BC changes, 3.0 might be a better version
number... Especially as possibly it will not be ever released, so it
leaves space for later mostly-BC releases 2.5, 2.6, etc.

> - eliminate as much
> internal reflection as we can, assuming most of the stuff we depend
> on statically exists, bump supported external libraries versions.
>
> Specifically
> 1. take the following for granted:
>   java.util.concurrent.* exists
>   java.util.regex.Pattern exists
>   java.lang.Enum exists

So it will require J2SE 1.5. (Too bad we will not introduce generics
in the API then...) Surely, whoever needs the GWE workaround fix will
use that anyway. But some others may will not like this... Since the
reflection code is already there and works well for ages, I don't see
if this is a win in practice. (Although sentimentally I agree...)

>   org.w3c.dom.* exists
> 2. ditch support for all older JSP versions, thus remove need for
> reflectively use non-public constructor (one of things we trip over on GAE)

*All* older JSP-s, even 2.0? Are you sure that's wise? But, if it
absolutely can't be done under GAE (sorry, I don't remember the
details), that's a different story.

> 3. require modern JDOM and recent Rhino (and possibly, recent
> Jython - not sure if there were any non-BWC developments there)

Right.

> 4. ditch all of our custom logging framework in favor of SLF4J

That's certainly a bit too aggressive... Is it a big pain if we just
left what we already have in, and just add SLF4J support too, and if
someone needs support for yet-another-log-library, we just point to
SLF4J from now on? Because, I think 2.4 should be mostly just a
drop-in replacement for 2.3. It should be an quick and easy remedy for
those who now want to run their FM 2.3-dependant app on GWE (and
remember, sometimes you don't even realize that you have a such
dependency, it might be in 3rd party code, that you don't want to
fiddle with), and while you can expect J2SE 1.5 in that case, I don't
know about if you can expect that everyone already uses SLF4J there.
Also, the less BC 2.4 is, the longer we should support the 2.3.x line,
and I surely hate to commit into 3 branches.

> 5. ditch that javax.swing dependency for good
>
> As for disappointment - last summer, I did spend one afternoon on
> backporting null handling from 2.4 to 2.3, just to see how much of
> it could be done in a backwards-compatible fashion. I can do it in a
> pinch.

Really? That would be great. I wonder what did you done with the null
keyword though. Did it become to .null (dot-null, and hence
special-variable)?

> The other option is to just plow ahead with 2.4. This would require
> some commitment from Jonathan - my problem with 2.4 is that I'm
> fairly confident in my knowledge of 2.3 codebase, but not so much in
> 2.4 - I did some forays into it specifically to get acquainted, but
> still not 100%. If JR would return to the project and hammer on the
> 2.4 code until Daniel is happy with it,

(Wow... is that a way of measuring program quality? ;) )

> that'd be an alternative.
>
> If we want to move fast, though (and I think we do), I might start
> on the 2.3 modernization route.

Waiting for 3.0 is obviously unrealistic... But more importantly, we
need an almost-2.3-compatible version here that runs on GWT, and 3.0
is not BC at all.

> Attila.
>
> On 2010.02.03., at 17:18, Daniel Dekany wrote:
>
>> I think what's going to happen is that we rename 2.4 to 3.0, and then
>> create a 2.4 that breaks backward compatibility a little bit with 2.3
>> due to the changes necessarily for GAE compatibility. (It's our policy
>> that if the 2nd version number is not changed, then the release must
>> be backward compatible.) However, since then 2.4 is a non-BC release
>> anyway, it would be a good opportunity to fix some other things too
>> that are *minor* backward compatibility violations as well, namely:
>> 
>> - Adapt to the latest JDOM API
>> 
>> - Maybe turn on syntax auto-detection (<> VS []) by default
>> 
>> So, this way 2.4 will be quite a disappointment for most users, since
>> they expect lot of new features form such a version change, but it's
>> an emergency, so... I would just ensure that any planned new features
>> can be added later without breaking backward compatibility again. (As
>> part of this, I want to reserve some otherwise extreme patterns in
>> format strings, so advanced formatting can be added later in the 2.4.x
>> line. Things like that.)
>> 
>> OK, the important question is: when. Attila may will say that he
>> initiated some negotiations with Google, so he would rather wait... I
>> don't know, Attila, what do you think? I for sure didn't started
>> working on this yet... But I allocate some time for it, if the plan
>> will be what I said above... Any opinions?
>> 
>> 
>> Monday, February 1, 2010, 6:34:59 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>>> Hey, Can any one plz tell me, is there any progress on removing
>>> Swing dependency and making FM work on GAE, yet !!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sudhir Nimavat
>>> Senior software engineer. 
>>> Quick start global PVT LTD.
>>> Baroda - 390007 
>>> Gujarat, India
>>> 
>>> I do know everything, just not all at once. It's a virtual memory problem.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Attila Szegedi <[email protected]>
>>> To: FreeMarker-user <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Mon, 1 February, 2010 3:31:11 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [FreeMarker-user] Attila, do you want me to connect you with Google for GAE support?
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> yes, I'd like that.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>>  Attila.
>>> 
>>> On 2010.01.31., at 20:56, Jeremy Chone wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Attila, 
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry, this one slipped under the crack. Do you want me to connect you with someone at Google for the GAE support. 
>>>> 
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Jeremy Chone
>>>> +1 415 699 9912

-- 
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com