You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com> on 2005/03/10 17:48:16 UTC
[James-NG] Groovy after all?
Hi,
One of the big arguments against Groovy in JamesNG was the IDE support,
and it seems not to hold in the near future.
I just found this work in progress, and it looks very promissing:
http://groovy.codehaus.org/IntelliJ+Plugin
Ahmed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: [James-NG] Groovy after all?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Serge Knystautas wrote:
> > "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> > > One of the big arguments against Groovy in JamesNG was
> > > the IDE support,
> > > and it seems not to hold in the near future.
> > ?? Where did you hear that? Groovy works fine with
> > BSF, and there was some
> > work on BSF support.
> Check the thread where we discussed JamesNG. There was
> concern the Groovy was a newer tech than Java or XML or
> the like, and so you would have less tool (and everything)
> support. This primarily was in the context of using
> Groovy to assemble the JamesNG POJOs instead of a
> conventional container.
<<shrug>> My comment was that Groovy should not be the way of doing config,
but it could be A way of driving configuration. That is far from saying
that JAMES should not have support for Groovy.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: [James-NG] Groovy after all?
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:23:41 -0500
"Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
>> One of the big arguments against Groovy in JamesNG was
>>the IDE support,
>> and it seems not to hold in the near future.
>
> ?? Where did you hear that? Groovy works fine with
>BSF, and there was some
> work on BSF support.
Noel, I think you've been working too many hours lately.
You seem to have skimmed or lost context of many threads.
:)
Check the thread where we discussed JamesNG. There was
concern the Groovy was a newer tech than Java or XML or
the like, and so you would have less tool (and everything)
support. This primarily was in the context of using
Groovy to assemble the JamesNG POJOs instead of a
conventional container.
--
Serge Knystautas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: [James-NG] Groovy after all?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> One of the big arguments against Groovy in JamesNG was the IDE support,
> and it seems not to hold in the near future.
?? Where did you hear that? Groovy works fine with BSF, and there was some
work on BSF support.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org