You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@freemarker.apache.org by Siegfried Goeschl <si...@gmail.com> on 2017/03/06 11:07:26 UTC
Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Hi folks,
I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
One piece of code which could be useful to the public is https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
* Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
* Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
* I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
* It is already under ASL-2.0
So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
Thanks in advance,
Siegfried Goeschl
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Siegfried Goeschl <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Denis,
a few thoughts along the line
* all of the mentioned dependencies are ASL 2.0 so in terms of licences that is as safe as it gets
* personally I would have a hard time NOT use Apache Commons CSV :-)
Thanks in advance,
Siegfried Goeschl
> On 6 Mar 2017, at 12:52, bredelet@me.com wrote:
>
> Thanks Siegfried, looks good.
>
> It has dependency on org.jayway.jsonpath, org.apache.poi and org.apache.commons, need to think how to handle that (I may select a different csv parser in fact).
>
> Regards,
>
> -- Denis.
> Original Message
> From: Siegfried Goeschl
> Sent: Monday, 6 March 2017 11:07
> To: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
> Reply To: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>
> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>
> * Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>
> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by br...@me.com.
Thanks Siegfried, looks good.
It has dependency on org.jayway.jsonpath, org.apache.poi and org.apache.commons, need to think how to handle that (I may select a different csv parser in fact).
Regards,
-- Denis.
Original Message
From: Siegfried Goeschl
Sent: Monday, 6 March 2017 11:07
To: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Reply To: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Hi folks,
I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
One piece of code which could be useful to the public is https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
* Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
* Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
* I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
* It is already under ASL-2.0
So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
Thanks in advance,
Siegfried Goeschl
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by David E Jones <de...@dejc.com>.
On Mar 6 2017, at 7:24 am, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
> Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
This sort of contribution seems to come up a lot with open source projects,
and IMO this is in the category of something that doesn't make sense in the
core project but rather as an extension or add on that (at least initially) is
better as a separate project. GitHub or the like are helpful places to host
them and some page on the FreeMarker site (or in a wiki) can be dedicated to
listing these related projects. I've seen these referred to as 'awesome'
lists, but I have not idea where that term came from!
-David
> Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
>
> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>
> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>
> * Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>
> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
>
> \--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Siegfried Goeschl <si...@gmail.com>.
HI folks,
I will migrate the Groovy script to Java-only code on GitHub in the next few weeks - I guess my colleagues will be happy to have JDK-only dependency :-)
When I’m finished you can still decide if you would like to setup links to (more or less) useful contributions or consider a code contribution :-)
Thanks in advance,
Siegfried Goeschl
> On 8 Mar 2017, at 08:00, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>
> Note that freemarker-online tries to avoid taking any serious
> workload. Surely it can be easily DoS-ed to death, but it tries not to
> be useful for doing actual work (like you can't upload data file to
> transform), so at least well behaving users won't kill it. It's for
> trying the template language.
>
> Something that users can download and run themselves is an entirely
> different story of course. I'm not sure if there would be a
> significant overlap with freemarker-online though, given how little
> freemarker-online can do, by design. Well, unless the standalone tool
> also have a browser interface (as opposed to SWT or Swing), they may
> want to share something like a better FTL editor for example. Also, a
> GUI and a CLI tool can surely share a lot of course.
>
>
> Wednesday, March 8, 2017, 7:03:13 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote:
>
>> Hi Siegfried,
>>
>> Thanks for sharing your work!
>> In my view, the main question is around how we can position the tool
>> like what you implemented. In other words, would it belong to report
>> generation area, simple data conversion tool area, or generic
>> freemarker execution tool (or CLI) area?
>> In my gut feeling, it could be best if it is possible to merge the
>> freemarker-online-tester tool and your work together, and position it
>> as a more generic freemarker CLI (and GUI support later?) tool. So
>> people may download the tool to execute/test ftl sources locally with
>> data, or we can deploy the tool as online service
>> (freemarker-online-tester). Perhaps in the future, the CLI tool may
>> support GUI, CLI, and web-online modes for users' convenience.
>> So, if this vision is okay to the community, it might be worth
>> combining both efforts into one as a new product (and as a subproject
>> of freemarker).
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Woonsan
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> as far as I’m concerned
>>>
>>> * At the end of the day the committers & PMC decide what become part of the project
>>> * The same is said for adding links to external projects :-)
>>> * The users do care about solving a problem a hand
>>> * They don’t care a millisecond if it is part of an ecosystem or not as long as they can find the tools they need and get their stuff done
>>> * An alive-and-kicking ecosystem will result in new users of FreeMarker
>>> * They might not even care if there is Velocity or FreeMarker under the hood :-)
>>> * I’m aware of http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com <http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/> and I think this is a brilliant idea
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 6 Mar 2017, at 16:24, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Regarding if it's an useful contribution to the project. Currently,
>>>> the Apache FreeMarker (incubating) project is only the engine itself.
>>>> So unless we widen the scope of the project, while it certainly helps
>>>> with the popularity/usefulness of the FreeMarker project, it's not a
>>>> direct contribution to it.
>>>>
>>>> Some may point out that the project already have multiple "products",
>>>> all in its own repository (but still under the umbrella of the Apache
>>>> FreeMarker project):
>>>>
>>>> - freemarker: The engine itself, freemarker.jar. This is the only thing
>>>> has releases. The others are just dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> - freemarker-docgen: Transforms XDocBook to HTML. The reason it's here
>>>> is that both our homepage and the Manual are generated with this.
>>>>
>>>> - freemarker-site: The content of the homepage
>>>>
>>>> - Recently we started working on bringing over the small project
>>>> behind http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. So it's just yet
>>>> another 3rd party tool, so why bring it in as a "product" of the
>>>> project? The intent is that it will be part of our home page (so
>>>> it's not a product with actual releases). It's a "tool" for trying
>>>> out the engine itself, it has no other intended utility, so it
>>>> fits in. Though the real incentive was that we saw the service being
>>>> endangered (becoming outdated, etc.), and we want a service where
>>>> the users can try the engine quickly. Also we have contributed to it
>>>> substantially... we don't want those work hours to be lost.
>>>>
>>>> So these are all stuff used for publish/documenting the engine itself.
>>>>
>>>> But I'm not saying that it's totally impossible to bring in standalone
>>>> tools as additional "products". I'm just not sure if we want get into
>>>> that business. Because, what policy we want to follow? Why some
>>>> project remains on GitHub, and why some become products of the
>>>> FreeMarker project? Is that good for the ecosystem?
>>>>
>>>> (BTW, there's FMPP for example, another command line tool for
>>>> FreeMarker. It has always remained an independent GitHub project. It
>>>> was actually written by me (when I was still quite junior so I'm not
>>>> very proud of it... but it works), so surely I could use my influence,
>>>> but I just think it fits in. However, it's linked from the
>>>> freemarker.org side menu, for ages... can be seen as an abuse of
>>>> power. (-: Heck, I have never though of that... I will remove that
>>>> link. But, note that freemarker-online is also linked there, simply
>>>> because it's quite useful for many users. So for widely useful and
>>>> proven stuff that's a possibility.)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
>>>>> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>>>>>
>>>>> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
>>>>> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
>>>>> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>>>>>
>>>>> * Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
>>>>> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
>>>>> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
>>>>> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>>>>>
>>>>> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
>>>>> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>
>>>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Daniel Dekany
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Daniel Dekany
>
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu>.
Note that freemarker-online tries to avoid taking any serious
workload. Surely it can be easily DoS-ed to death, but it tries not to
be useful for doing actual work (like you can't upload data file to
transform), so at least well behaving users won't kill it. It's for
trying the template language.
Something that users can download and run themselves is an entirely
different story of course. I'm not sure if there would be a
significant overlap with freemarker-online though, given how little
freemarker-online can do, by design. Well, unless the standalone tool
also have a browser interface (as opposed to SWT or Swing), they may
want to share something like a better FTL editor for example. Also, a
GUI and a CLI tool can surely share a lot of course.
Wednesday, March 8, 2017, 7:03:13 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote:
> Hi Siegfried,
>
> Thanks for sharing your work!
> In my view, the main question is around how we can position the tool
> like what you implemented. In other words, would it belong to report
> generation area, simple data conversion tool area, or generic
> freemarker execution tool (or CLI) area?
> In my gut feeling, it could be best if it is possible to merge the
> freemarker-online-tester tool and your work together, and position it
> as a more generic freemarker CLI (and GUI support later?) tool. So
> people may download the tool to execute/test ftl sources locally with
> data, or we can deploy the tool as online service
> (freemarker-online-tester). Perhaps in the future, the CLI tool may
> support GUI, CLI, and web-online modes for users' convenience.
> So, if this vision is okay to the community, it might be worth
> combining both efforts into one as a new product (and as a subproject
> of freemarker).
> What do others think?
>
> Regards,
>
> Woonsan
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> as far as I\u2019m concerned
>>
>> * At the end of the day the committers & PMC decide what become part of the project
>> * The same is said for adding links to external projects :-)
>> * The users do care about solving a problem a hand
>> * They don\u2019t care a millisecond if it is part of an ecosystem or not as long as they can find the tools they need and get their stuff done
>> * An alive-and-kicking ecosystem will result in new users of FreeMarker
>> * They might not even care if there is Velocity or FreeMarker under the hood :-)
>> * I\u2019m aware of http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com <http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/> and I think this is a brilliant idea
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 6 Mar 2017, at 16:24, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Regarding if it's an useful contribution to the project. Currently,
>>> the Apache FreeMarker (incubating) project is only the engine itself.
>>> So unless we widen the scope of the project, while it certainly helps
>>> with the popularity/usefulness of the FreeMarker project, it's not a
>>> direct contribution to it.
>>>
>>> Some may point out that the project already have multiple "products",
>>> all in its own repository (but still under the umbrella of the Apache
>>> FreeMarker project):
>>>
>>> - freemarker: The engine itself, freemarker.jar. This is the only thing
>>> has releases. The others are just dependencies.
>>>
>>> - freemarker-docgen: Transforms XDocBook to HTML. The reason it's here
>>> is that both our homepage and the Manual are generated with this.
>>>
>>> - freemarker-site: The content of the homepage
>>>
>>> - Recently we started working on bringing over the small project
>>> behind http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. So it's just yet
>>> another 3rd party tool, so why bring it in as a "product" of the
>>> project? The intent is that it will be part of our home page (so
>>> it's not a product with actual releases). It's a "tool" for trying
>>> out the engine itself, it has no other intended utility, so it
>>> fits in. Though the real incentive was that we saw the service being
>>> endangered (becoming outdated, etc.), and we want a service where
>>> the users can try the engine quickly. Also we have contributed to it
>>> substantially... we don't want those work hours to be lost.
>>>
>>> So these are all stuff used for publish/documenting the engine itself.
>>>
>>> But I'm not saying that it's totally impossible to bring in standalone
>>> tools as additional "products". I'm just not sure if we want get into
>>> that business. Because, what policy we want to follow? Why some
>>> project remains on GitHub, and why some become products of the
>>> FreeMarker project? Is that good for the ecosystem?
>>>
>>> (BTW, there's FMPP for example, another command line tool for
>>> FreeMarker. It has always remained an independent GitHub project. It
>>> was actually written by me (when I was still quite junior so I'm not
>>> very proud of it... but it works), so surely I could use my influence,
>>> but I just think it fits in. However, it's linked from the
>>> freemarker.org side menu, for ages... can be seen as an abuse of
>>> power. (-: Heck, I have never though of that... I will remove that
>>> link. But, note that freemarker-online is also linked there, simply
>>> because it's quite useful for many users. So for widely useful and
>>> proven stuff that's a possibility.)
>>>
>>> Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
>>>> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>>>>
>>>> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
>>>> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
>>>> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>>>>
>>>> * Don\u2019t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
>>>> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
>>>> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
>>>> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>>>>
>>>> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
>>>> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>
>>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Daniel Dekany
>>>
>>
>
--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Woonsan Ko <wo...@apache.org>.
Hi Siegfried,
Thanks for sharing your work!
In my view, the main question is around how we can position the tool
like what you implemented. In other words, would it belong to report
generation area, simple data conversion tool area, or generic
freemarker execution tool (or CLI) area?
In my gut feeling, it could be best if it is possible to merge the
freemarker-online-tester tool and your work together, and position it
as a more generic freemarker CLI (and GUI support later?) tool. So
people may download the tool to execute/test ftl sources locally with
data, or we can deploy the tool as online service
(freemarker-online-tester). Perhaps in the future, the CLI tool may
support GUI, CLI, and web-online modes for users' convenience.
So, if this vision is okay to the community, it might be worth
combining both efforts into one as a new product (and as a subproject
of freemarker).
What do others think?
Regards,
Woonsan
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> as far as I’m concerned
>
> * At the end of the day the committers & PMC decide what become part of the project
> * The same is said for adding links to external projects :-)
> * The users do care about solving a problem a hand
> * They don’t care a millisecond if it is part of an ecosystem or not as long as they can find the tools they need and get their stuff done
> * An alive-and-kicking ecosystem will result in new users of FreeMarker
> * They might not even care if there is Velocity or FreeMarker under the hood :-)
> * I’m aware of http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com <http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/> and I think this is a brilliant idea
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
>
>
>> On 6 Mar 2017, at 16:24, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>>
>> Regarding if it's an useful contribution to the project. Currently,
>> the Apache FreeMarker (incubating) project is only the engine itself.
>> So unless we widen the scope of the project, while it certainly helps
>> with the popularity/usefulness of the FreeMarker project, it's not a
>> direct contribution to it.
>>
>> Some may point out that the project already have multiple "products",
>> all in its own repository (but still under the umbrella of the Apache
>> FreeMarker project):
>>
>> - freemarker: The engine itself, freemarker.jar. This is the only thing
>> has releases. The others are just dependencies.
>>
>> - freemarker-docgen: Transforms XDocBook to HTML. The reason it's here
>> is that both our homepage and the Manual are generated with this.
>>
>> - freemarker-site: The content of the homepage
>>
>> - Recently we started working on bringing over the small project
>> behind http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. So it's just yet
>> another 3rd party tool, so why bring it in as a "product" of the
>> project? The intent is that it will be part of our home page (so
>> it's not a product with actual releases). It's a "tool" for trying
>> out the engine itself, it has no other intended utility, so it
>> fits in. Though the real incentive was that we saw the service being
>> endangered (becoming outdated, etc.), and we want a service where
>> the users can try the engine quickly. Also we have contributed to it
>> substantially... we don't want those work hours to be lost.
>>
>> So these are all stuff used for publish/documenting the engine itself.
>>
>> But I'm not saying that it's totally impossible to bring in standalone
>> tools as additional "products". I'm just not sure if we want get into
>> that business. Because, what policy we want to follow? Why some
>> project remains on GitHub, and why some become products of the
>> FreeMarker project? Is that good for the ecosystem?
>>
>> (BTW, there's FMPP for example, another command line tool for
>> FreeMarker. It has always remained an independent GitHub project. It
>> was actually written by me (when I was still quite junior so I'm not
>> very proud of it... but it works), so surely I could use my influence,
>> but I just think it fits in. However, it's linked from the
>> freemarker.org side menu, for ages... can be seen as an abuse of
>> power. (-: Heck, I have never though of that... I will remove that
>> link. But, note that freemarker-online is also linked there, simply
>> because it's quite useful for many users. So for widely useful and
>> proven stuff that's a possibility.)
>>
>> Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
>>
>>
>> Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
>>> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>>>
>>> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
>>> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
>>> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>>>
>>> * Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
>>> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
>>> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
>>> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>>>
>>> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
>>> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Daniel Dekany
>>
>
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Siegfried Goeschl <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi Daniel,
as far as I’m concerned
* At the end of the day the committers & PMC decide what become part of the project
* The same is said for adding links to external projects :-)
* The users do care about solving a problem a hand
* They don’t care a millisecond if it is part of an ecosystem or not as long as they can find the tools they need and get their stuff done
* An alive-and-kicking ecosystem will result in new users of FreeMarker
* They might not even care if there is Velocity or FreeMarker under the hood :-)
* I’m aware of http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com <http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/> and I think this is a brilliant idea
Thanks in advance,
Siegfried Goeschl
> On 6 Mar 2017, at 16:24, Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu> wrote:
>
> Regarding if it's an useful contribution to the project. Currently,
> the Apache FreeMarker (incubating) project is only the engine itself.
> So unless we widen the scope of the project, while it certainly helps
> with the popularity/usefulness of the FreeMarker project, it's not a
> direct contribution to it.
>
> Some may point out that the project already have multiple "products",
> all in its own repository (but still under the umbrella of the Apache
> FreeMarker project):
>
> - freemarker: The engine itself, freemarker.jar. This is the only thing
> has releases. The others are just dependencies.
>
> - freemarker-docgen: Transforms XDocBook to HTML. The reason it's here
> is that both our homepage and the Manual are generated with this.
>
> - freemarker-site: The content of the homepage
>
> - Recently we started working on bringing over the small project
> behind http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. So it's just yet
> another 3rd party tool, so why bring it in as a "product" of the
> project? The intent is that it will be part of our home page (so
> it's not a product with actual releases). It's a "tool" for trying
> out the engine itself, it has no other intended utility, so it
> fits in. Though the real incentive was that we saw the service being
> endangered (becoming outdated, etc.), and we want a service where
> the users can try the engine quickly. Also we have contributed to it
> substantially... we don't want those work hours to be lost.
>
> So these are all stuff used for publish/documenting the engine itself.
>
> But I'm not saying that it's totally impossible to bring in standalone
> tools as additional "products". I'm just not sure if we want get into
> that business. Because, what policy we want to follow? Why some
> project remains on GitHub, and why some become products of the
> FreeMarker project? Is that good for the ecosystem?
>
> (BTW, there's FMPP for example, another command line tool for
> FreeMarker. It has always remained an independent GitHub project. It
> was actually written by me (when I was still quite junior so I'm not
> very proud of it... but it works), so surely I could use my influence,
> but I just think it fits in. However, it's linked from the
> freemarker.org side menu, for ages... can be seen as an abuse of
> power. (-: Heck, I have never though of that... I will remove that
> link. But, note that freemarker-online is also linked there, simply
> because it's quite useful for many users. So for widely useful and
> proven stuff that's a possibility.)
>
> Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
>
>
> Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
>> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>>
>> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
>> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
>> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>>
>> * Don’t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
>> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
>> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
>> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>>
>> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
>> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Daniel Dekany
>
Re: Request For Comment - freemarker-cli
Posted by Daniel Dekany <dd...@freemail.hu>.
Regarding if it's an useful contribution to the project. Currently,
the Apache FreeMarker (incubating) project is only the engine itself.
So unless we widen the scope of the project, while it certainly helps
with the popularity/usefulness of the FreeMarker project, it's not a
direct contribution to it.
Some may point out that the project already have multiple "products",
all in its own repository (but still under the umbrella of the Apache
FreeMarker project):
- freemarker: The engine itself, freemarker.jar. This is the only thing
has releases. The others are just dependencies.
- freemarker-docgen: Transforms XDocBook to HTML. The reason it's here
is that both our homepage and the Manual are generated with this.
- freemarker-site: The content of the homepage
- Recently we started working on bringing over the small project
behind http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. So it's just yet
another 3rd party tool, so why bring it in as a "product" of the
project? The intent is that it will be part of our home page (so
it's not a product with actual releases). It's a "tool" for trying
out the engine itself, it has no other intended utility, so it
fits in. Though the real incentive was that we saw the service being
endangered (becoming outdated, etc.), and we want a service where
the users can try the engine quickly. Also we have contributed to it
substantially... we don't want those work hours to be lost.
So these are all stuff used for publish/documenting the engine itself.
But I'm not saying that it's totally impossible to bring in standalone
tools as additional "products". I'm just not sure if we want get into
that business. Because, what policy we want to follow? Why some
project remains on GitHub, and why some become products of the
FreeMarker project? Is that good for the ecosystem?
(BTW, there's FMPP for example, another command line tool for
FreeMarker. It has always remained an independent GitHub project. It
was actually written by me (when I was still quite junior so I'm not
very proud of it... but it works), so surely I could use my influence,
but I just think it fits in. However, it's linked from the
freemarker.org side menu, for ages... can be seen as an abuse of
power. (-: Heck, I have never though of that... I will remove that
link. But, note that freemarker-online is also linked there, simply
because it's quite useful for many users. So for widely useful and
proven stuff that's a possibility.)
Anyway, anybody has thoughts about this?
Monday, March 6, 2017, 12:07:26 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm playing around with Template Engines for a couple of years and
> over Christmas I moved some of my code from Velocity for FreeMarker.
>
> One piece of code which could be useful to the public is
> https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli
> <https://github.com/sgoeschl/freemarker-cli>
>
> * Don\u2019t now if I already re-invented the wheel :-)
> * Please note that this is my first contact with Apache FreeMarker
> * I would like to ditch Groovy and migrate to a stand-alone Java application
> * It is already under ASL-2.0
>
> So the question is - could this be a useful contribution to the
> project?! As far as I know open source is not oneway only :-)
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany