To clarify, he calls it simply "FreeMarker" (no "Apache" in it), and it's from a branch that was made (and then was abandoned for, I guess, 12 years, or so) long before donation to Apache. But, with the donation to ASF, "FreeMarker" is the trademark of the ASF.
On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 6:45 AM <le...@flowlogix.com> wrote: > Hi, Jonathan, > > First of all, I am disappointed to see all the personal attacks from you > here. There is no cause of need for this. > Let’s keep civilized. > > The major issue here I believe is that (at least in my perception) you are > trying to take the project out of Apache, > but not following the rules for doing so (are there rules?). > > You can’t have your cake and eat it too. IMHO you can’t call it Apache > Freemarker and not follow Apache rules. > > Of course, you can make a fork and innovate from there, but I don’t think > you can call that Apache FreeMarker. > > In other words: > - You can contribute to the project Apache way > - Don’t call your fork Apache Freemarker > > You can’t have both. > > > On Nov 9, 2023, at 7:50 PM, Jonathan Revusky <revu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 9:00 PM Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >> I never knew there was an "original" freemarker project. > >> > > > > So you actually thought that FreeMarker was developed at Apache? > > > > Well, no. FreeMarker is a very very old project at this point. > FreeMarker 1 > > was originally written by a guy named Benjamin Geer, in the late 90's. > > Though Ben Geer was, strictly speaking, the original author, I don't > think > > he was really involved in the project for very long. He wasn't involved > > when I showed up in the community in late 2001 anyway. At that point, I > > basically took over, and within a few months, the thing was a complete > > rewrite. And that was when FreeMarker 2.0 came into being. From 2002 to > > 2004/2005 we went through 4 release cycles, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. Each > > release cycle added quite a bit more functionality. It is kinda sad that > > there is just about no meaningful difference between 2023 "Apache > > FreeMarker" and FreeMarker 2.3 from 2005 (or even late 2004). > > > > But the thing to understand is that this Apache FreeMarker code, the > > continuation of the FreeMarker 2.3 codebase, is really something very > > ancient. Most of the work on this was done in the period from 2002 to > 2005 > > or so, about a decade before there was any "Apache FreeMarker". > Basically, > > the project was very old and stagnant at that point and came to Apache to > > die, I guess. So I've decided to resuscitate it. Or give it my best > shot... > > > > > >> Your web site is down, the documentation on the GitHub project is > sparse. > >> > > > > That is true at the moment but is all quite remediable -- especially if > > some people want to get involved and do some heavy lifting. (I get the > > feeling that's not you!) In any case, I said quite clearly that this is a > > preview. You can't expect something that is a preview to be as polished > as > > something as old as FreeMarker 2.3, which has been pretty stable since > 2004 > > or thereabouts! > > > > > >> There is no way to tell whether it really is more advanced or not. > >> > > > > Well, frankly, this is just nonsense. There is no legitimate controversy > > over whether this version of FreeMarker is more advanced or not. Of > course > > it is. As I explained in the previous note in response to Taher > Alkhateeb, > > it is built on top of the 2.4 codebase, while Apache FreeMarker is a > > continuation of the 2.3 codebase. Aside from that, just scan over the > > commit record: https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/commits/master > > Truth told, over the last few months, I have effected something close to > a > > complete rewrite. > > > > But this is just ridiculous! Tell me, do you think there is some > legitimate > > controversy over whether JDK 8 is more advanced than JDK 7? That's just > > silly. In any case, both FreeMarker 2.3 and this FreeMarker 3.0 preview > > that I just announced are largely my work. Is it possible that an earlier > > version of work by the same author is more advanced than the later > version? > > Does that make any sense? Of course this version is more advanced! > > > > It can never be on Maven central, because the namespace (groupid) > >> "freemarker" is already claimed by Apache Freemarker. > >> > > > > Well, Ben... it is kind of disrespectful to talk such blatant nonsense to > > somebody. This is supposed to be some serious technical forum, isn't it? > > > > The "groupid" used on Maven Central is not something with any real > > transcendence at all. It certainly has no technical meaning. I mean, > look, > > here is an example. The main OSS project I'm working on, as I said > before, > > is CongoCC. A few months ago, our project (finally!) put out an > "artifact" > > on Maven Central. That is here: > > > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.congocc/org.congocc.parser.generator > > I later realized that somebody else had previously put up a Maven > artifact. > > That is here: > > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/com.clickhouse/org.congocc Funny > > enough, the guy who put that up was not even in touch with us about it > > beforehand. But the one we put up is, I guess, under org.congocc and the > > one put up earlier by a third party is under com.clickhouse, which I > guess > > is the URL he controls or his employer, or... I dunno... Actually, I just > > looked, and there is a patched version of FreeMarker 2.3.29 put up by > > Liferay, which is this one: > > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/com.liferay/org.freemarker > > > > But the point is that it just doesn't matter! The whole idea that I can't > > put something on Maven Central because this nothingburger project > controls > > the freemarker.org domain... Well, okay, I guess it's true that we can't > > use "org.freemarker" as a groupid since it's taken but... so what? So we > > use something else. (Duh.) When I decided on CongoCC as a new name for > the > > parser generator project, I checked whether congocc.org was available > and > > registered it. But I had anticipated having github.com/congocc as our > > "organization" location, but somehow that was taken, so we use > > github.com/congo-cc with a hyphen. Whatever. It would be a bit nicer if > we > > had congocc without the hyphen, but it's hardly a sine qua non either. > > > > Well, anyway, look, we're not acquainted, but I find this quite > > off-putting. You have the possibility of raising whatever technical > issue, > > making suggestions, giving feedback, and instead, you just come up with > > this flagrant nonsense about not being able to put up things on Maven > > Central (of course we can! LOL) .... or how it is so controversial that > the > > more advanced version of the codebase actually is more advanced (Of > course > > it is! LOL) .... or that some links being broken or the documentation > being > > patchy is somehow a permanent state of affairs... (Of course it's not!) > > > > Well, anyway, I felt I had to answer this, but if you spout more nonsense > > like this, I think I will just refrain from answering. In the past, I > have > > got into these annoying arguments with people because they got under my > > skin with this kind of stuff, but I suppose it's time to live and learn, > eh? > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> - Ben > >> > >> Am Do., 9. Nov. 2023 um 18:40 Uhr schrieb Taher Alkhateeb > >> <ta...@pythys.com.invalid>: > >>> > >>> > >>> I'm a little confused. Why aren't we joining efforts on the apache > >> version? Why make it "a pity if a wider group of > >>> people never get the benefit of this work"? Am I missing something too > >> obvious or too old or something? Is this code base completely > incompatible? > >> Is this a technical issue? > >>> > >>> Taher Alkhateeb > >>> > >>> On Wednesday, November 08, 2023 04:03 +03, Jonathan Revusky < > >> revu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Greetings, > >>> > >>> I thought to let people know that there is a vastly more advanced > version > >>> of FreeMarker available here: > https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3 > >>> > >>> You can build it via: > >>> > >>> git clone https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3.git > >>> cd freemarker3 > >>> ant > >>> > >>> Or, if you want, there is a prebuilt jarfile you can grab here: > >>> https://parsers.org/download/freemarker.jar > >>> > >>> Though it is actually a rather superficial new feature, I think that > one > >>> thing that people will enjoy is the new terser syntax. Basically, if a > >>> directive starts a line (aside from whitespace) there is no need for > any > >>> pointy (or square) brackets. So you can just write: > >>> > >>> #if foo == bar > >>> blah blah > >>> /#if > >>> > >>> You can look here for a more complete description: > >>> https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/wiki/Terse-Syntax and here > is > >> an > >>> example of a template from the old test suite rewritten using the > terser > >>> syntax: > >>> > >> > https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/blob/master/src/freemarker/testcase/template/test-switch.html > >>> > >>> In this version of FreeMarker, the #assign and #local directives > (though > >>> they still work in a backward-compatible mode) were replaced with the > >> newer > >>> #var and #set. This is (IMHO) a significant improvement and is > described > >>> here: https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/wiki/Strict-Vars > >>> > >>> Just generally speaking though, the biggest changes are really under > the > >>> hood and would not be so visible to the casual user. This FreeMarker > >>> codebase has been refactored so that it largely does away with all of > >> those > >>> TemplateXXXModel wrappers and mostly just directly uses POJOs. (Plain > Old > >>> Java Objects.) This is described here: > >>> https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/wiki/Under-the-Hood > >>> > >>> Various longstanding annoyances, like not being able to directly use a > >> map > >>> with non-string keys, have been addressed. > >>> > >>> Oh, it suddenly occurs to me that many (perhaps most) people on this > >>> mailing list do not know who I am. I am effectively the original author > >> of > >>> FreeMarker. I say "effectively" because there was a FreeMarker 1.x, > which > >>> was really little more than a weekend hack. The version that 99% of > >>> FreeMarker users have used, which is 2.x, was a complete rewrite and is > >>> largely my work. > >>> > >>> As for other questions about what is going on with this, for example, > >> why I > >>> have put some renewed effort into FreeMarker after all years... well, > my > >>> main open source efforts have been going into my rewrite of that old > >> JavaCC > >>> parser generator that FreeMarker 2.x was originally built with. The new > >>> version of JavaCC was originally called FreeCC, then when I > resuscitated > >> it > >>> a few years ago, I called it JavaCC 21, but it is now rebranded as > >> CongoCC. > >>> So, since FreeMarker is a key part of CongoCC, I found myself adding > the > >>> occasional new feature to FreeMarker (my own version, not Apache > >>> FreeMarker). For example, the feature described here > >>> https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/wiki/Macros-as-Functions was > >>> added to support CongoCC development back in 2020, but probably a lot > of > >>> FreeMarker users would appreciate this. > >>> > >>> So, at some point, I did rework FreeMarker to use CongoCC instead of > the > >>> legacy JavaCC. CongoCC is a much, much more powerful parser generator > >> than > >>> the original JavaCC, so it makes FreeMarker development comparatively a > >>> breeze. For example, I quite recently implemented assertions in > >> FreeMarker > >>> and this is where it is implemented: > >>> > >> > https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/blob/master/src/parser/Directives.inc.ccc#L417-L445 > >>> > >>> Or here is where ternary expressions are implemented: > >>> > >> > https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/blob/master/src/parser/Expressions.inc.ccc#L98-L118 > >>> You really should compare the FreeMarker grammar expressed with CongoCC > >> to > >>> the one that was written with legacy JavaCC, that is here: > >>> > https://github.com/apache/freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/main/javacc/FTL.jj > >>> > >>> So I rewrote FreeMarker (it is largely a rewrite at this point) to: (a) > >>> have a better tool for CongoCC development and (b) to provide a > showcase > >>> for CongoCC's capabilities. > >>> > >>> As for my plans, well, I do think it would be a pity if a wider group > of > >>> people never get the benefit of this work. Whether I intend to call > this > >>> version of FreeMarker "FreeMarker 3" or rename it to "Congo > Templates", I > >>> still haven't decided about that. I really only put some serious effort > >>> into the FreeMarker codebase starting this summer and the work kind of > >> took > >>> on a life of its own. > >>> > >>> In any case, anybody who is interested in getting involved, by all > means. > >>> Maybe start a discussion here: > >>> https://github.com/freemarker/freemarker3/discussions > >>> > >>> Best Regards and Greetings from Spain, > >>> > >>> Jonathan Revusky > >> > > -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany
