on 11/27/2000 11:44 AM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compare the projects Turbine, Cocoon and BSF. When I first looked at > Turbine it was hell to setup. The second time I had a look it was much > easier (Only DB setup was painful). Last time I looked it was a breeze to > setup and strangely enough the community has grown considerably. > > Cocoon1 had a relatively low cost of entry and had a large community. With > Cocoon2 the cost increased significantly and has continued to increase. > Thus the developer community around it has declined a bit recently. > > BSF has a higher cost of entry and has good code - thus has only attracted > a small community so far. > > Adding in required libs reduces cost of entry for developers of Ant which > means more ideas/code hackery/time is likely to be contributed. This is the > main aim of this. I can't agree more. As one of the main instigators for Turbine, I can't even begin to express how much adding the .jar's to CVS has helped the overall project. So, until we have a system that makes it easy for people to grab .jar's from a website using Ant, I say put the .jar's in CVS and anyone who objects should only respond with code that implements a JPAN. I'm tired of arguing about this issue. For now the summary is that .jar's in CVS are a good thing. Once someone decides to implement JPAN, I will remove the .jar's. thanks, -jon -- twice of not very much is still a lot more than not very much
