Re: IRC for freemarker

[Jacques Le Roux]

This worked for me https://webchat.freenode.net/# (freemarker channel, I used 
my Apache username but I guess any works)

Jacques

Le 29/10/2015 03:16, Pradeep Murugesan a écrit :

Team,


do we have any irc channel for freemarker ?


Pradeep.

Re: Should freemarker.org remain the canonical domain?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Makes sense

Jacques

Le 05/11/2015 09:19, Stephan Müller a écrit :

I think that freemarker.org should stay the canonical domain for the
incubation phase, and consider moving the canonical domain to an
apache.org subdomain after graduation.


Stephan.

Re: Is it time to start a FreeMarker 3 branch?

[Jacques Le Roux]

To keep things simple why not org.apache.freemarker?

Jacques

Le 01/12/2015 18:58, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

+1 on all you described for FTL3.

Just a side note, I like 'org.apache.freemarker3' better as new
package name. I saw a similar pattern in Apache Commons. e.g,
org.apache.commons.lang3.

Regards,

Woonsan


On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Sunday, November 29, 2015, 11:28:31 AM, Daniel Dekany wrote:

[snip]

- Dropping all the not-recommended-anymore and deprecated features,
   obviously. There's a lot, trust me...
- Rename things that has confusing name, or are in the wrong package
- Unify the concept of macros and (user-defined-)directives. Same with
   functions and methods. These are separate concepts yet similar in
   the current code base.
- Parser/syntax:
   - FTL3:
 - Null-aware, has a behavior that's more like Groovy's
 - Hash "map" type instead of "hash" (i.e., no string-keys-only BS
   anymore)
 - Better whitespace handling
 - Has simpler, more regular syntax.
 - Designed to make user-defined dialects possible
 - Some minor changes in expression syntax... doesn't mater for now.
   - Separately pluggable expression language and "outer" language
   - Made with IDE and template-introspection support in mind
- Template loading/caching:
   - A better version of the TemplateLoader mechanism. The current one
 has problems with being effective with DB for example.
   - In general, template loading/caching need to be more pluggable.
 Right now it's often hard to reuse your framework's existing
 caching facility for example.

So that's a FM 3.0, plus whatever I have forgotten about. That's a lot
of work you see there, but it's rewarding.

And one that I have forgotten:

- Modularize FM. There should be a bare-bone engine Maven module, and
   then a separate Servlet Maven module, a JSP Maven module, Jython
   module (if there's still interest in that), etc. (Maybe even XML
   support should be separate.) This will also help to migrate the
   project build to to Maven. Another aspect of this is that 3.0 can be
   released without all the other modules to be cleaned up and ready
   (especially Serlvet/JSP will be a substantial work).

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: [DISCUSS] graduation

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi All,

I can't promise I'd be very active but I could help you (I lurk from start) if 
you need more committers before the graduation

Jacques

Le 25/07/2016 à 17:00, Sergio Fernández a écrit :

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


The project's interest is to graduate, so obviously, I would prefer it
to graduate (and probably most mentors too). But I don't want to get
into a graduation vote that is improbable to pass. So I would prefer
if we first try to figure out the feelings of others.

Does any of you know a precedent of a project in similar state
passing?


Not that I'm aware...

You have to know IPMC we're normally very picky about community growth.
Therefore, although couple of mentors we already expressed our interest to
continue supporting the project (Jacopo and myself), there is no formal
trace of that. So before approaching the IPMC at general@incubator I'd try
to sort-out first the formal addition of the new PPMC members (i.e., vote).

After that I'd give it a try to the open discussion to see what's the
general mood of the people...




--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany


Thursday, July 21, 2016, 12:23:47 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


Thank you Sergio.

I am wondering if we should first run a vote in this list to clearly
express the desire of this community to graduate now (or wait).
Then we could start the discussion in the general list.
This is just an idea, if we prefer to ping the general list first, then
great.

Jacopo

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Sergio Fernández 
wrote:


Hi,

I think the graduation discussion has been spread in different threads.

So

I'd like to come back to the path.

 From my point of view the project could be ready for graduation. The

single

issue that could block that is the evolution of the community. Jacopo
offered to bring up this topic into general@incubator, to see what's

the

feeling from the folks not so closely related to the podling. Do we

still

want to approach it in this way?

Cheers,

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 6602747925
e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co

ignore_missing option of the <#include does not work

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi,

Since this is still incubating I think there is no user list yet (I tried to 
subscribe) so I send it here.

Anyway maybe I'll find the time to work on the reported issue: "ignore_missing option 
of the <#include does not work"

http://freemarker.org/docs/ref_directive_include.html

Of course I'd be happy if somebody beats me on it

Thanks

Jacques

Re: ignore_missing option of the <#include does not work

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 19/09/2016 à 08:39, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi,

Since this is still incubating I think there is no user list yet (I tried to 
subscribe) so I send it here.

Anyway maybe I'll find the time to work on the reported issue: "ignore_missing option 
of the <#include does not work"

http://freemarker.org/docs/ref_directive_include.html

Of course I'd be happy if somebody beats me on it

Thanks

Jacques



BTW, it's certainly a good idea to provide an "easy" example to test, please 
see my last comments at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8250

Thanks

Jacques

Re: [DISCUSS] graduation (again!)

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 28/12/2016 à 15:57, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

we have discussed this already some months ago and I think it is time to
restart the conversation now: does this community feel ready to graduate to
a Top Level Project (TLP) at the ASF?

I think that the incubation phase has been very useful for the FreeMarker
project/community: FreeMarker has now clearly defined and documented
copyrights ownership, the community has learned how to produce and publish
clean and neat releases, all the assets and infrastructure have been
migrated to the ASF, the community has learned how to smoothly interact and
work with the ASF ecosystem (e.g. the ASF Infra, the Incubator general
list).
I feel that there is not much more that FreeMarker can learn from the
incubation and that it is time to think about graduation.

The developer community is still small, but it is independent, diverse and
clearly capable of maintaining the FreeMarker product and supporting the
large user community: attracting new developer will always be one of the
primary goals of this project, but this will not change when the project
will be a TLP out of the Incubator.

What do you think?

Jacopo


I have not interacted much here, but I lurked and I indeed believe it's time 
for the next step.

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online


Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Jacopo,

Yes I'll try to discuss it with the infra team tomorrow, at least this 
weekend...

Jacques


Le 04/01/2017 à 19:59, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Thank you Jacques! Are you going to submit the request to the Infra team?
As soon as we have it setup we will plan the next moves. Please keep this
list posted with any progress or questions you may have to complete this
task.

Jacopo

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up
a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online

Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Done at 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-13246 feel 
free to comment/modify/improve

Jacques


Le 05/01/2017 à 22:33, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Jacopo,

Yes I'll try to discuss it with the infra team tomorrow, at least this 
weekend...

Jacques


Le 04/01/2017 à 19:59, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Thank you Jacques! Are you going to submit the request to the Infra team?
As soon as we have it setup we will plan the next moves. Please keep this
list posted with any progress or questions you may have to complete this
task.

Jacopo

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up
a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online

Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: FreeMarker Project Maturity Model Assessment

[Jacques Le Roux]

I'd prefer Confluence as we have experience with it in the OFBiz team

My 2cts

Jacques


Le 07/01/2017 à 18:49, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


We have never requested a wiki from infra... so I as far as know we
don't have it yet.


Should we request one? It can be useful to work together on a shared
document like in this case. Suggestions/proposals/preferences?

Jacopo

Re: FreeMarker Project Maturity Model Assessment

[Jacques Le Roux]

The Confluence version at the ASF works well now. It's a reliable WYSIWG 
version.

One of the big advantages of Confluence is it allows finely grained 
permissions. This is not only useful with spam.

Another advantage is it has, even at the ASF, a lot of available plugins

This said it can be sometimes a bit slow, and creating long complicated page can turn to a be nightmare especially if you put a lot of images. At 
least now you never lose anything, it has a very good automated versionning system...


Jacques

PS: I don't think anybody is a Confluence huge fan ;) 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1adaf03b52c34de6a3502a9bab2f8c27548071d2105aeac41f11ccf4@1432806673@%3Cuser.ofbiz.apache.org%3E



Le 07/01/2017 à 20:36, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Does Confluence work well for developer topics though? Because I guess
we will want to use it for FM3. I had to use it on workplace, a
relatively old version, and it was a nightmare because it gets
confused by the odd stuff we programmers write... and yes, there are
some escaping rules and all, but over all it wasn't practical to use,
plus it was buggy... though yet again maybe nowadays it's better.


Saturday, January 7, 2017, 7:17:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


I'd prefer Confluence as we have experience with it in the OFBiz team

My 2cts

Jacques


Le 07/01/2017 à 18:49, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


We have never requested a wiki from infra... so I as far as know we
don't have it yet.

Should we request one? It can be useful to work together on a shared
document like in this case. Suggestions/proposals/preferences?

Jacopo

Re: Confluence Wiki Administrators

[Jacques Le Roux]

I can help

Jacques


Le 10/01/2017 à 13:52, Sharan Foga a écrit :

Hi All

As part of the Infra request for the confluence wiki, I'll need the name of a 
person (or people) to administer the wiki for the project. It's good to have a 
few people so there is backup. I'm happy to volunteer  – is  anyone else 
interested in being a wiki administrator? (If so then please respond and 
include your confluence username as I'll need it for the infra request).

Thanks
Sharan

Re: Proposed Tweets for Freemarker Twitter Account

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 10/01/2017 à 15:29, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Currently only I have access to that account. I guess I can give
rights to other users. Who should get that? Maybe you and Jacopo for
starters? If not for more, but in case I'm hit by a truck tomorrow.


I actually don't plan to post anything (but I am happy to provide feedback
and suggestions) so I don't need the credentials.
As regards the mechanism to share credentials, we could consider TweetDeck:
I have never used it but I know that other projects are using it to manage
as a team the project's Twitter account.

Jacopo


FYI, when we started to use the OFBiz tweeter account I tried to use TweetDeck, 
I finally gave up, just my feeling :)

Jacques

Re: [VOTE] Which logo?

[Jacques Le Roux]

I vote for [1,2] though I'd prefer a bit less shadow

If I'd like to follow the flat design trend I'd choose [1,3] but I'm not 
against skeuomorphism when done right

Jacques


Le 16/01/2017 à 12:11, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

We will replace our square logo at Twitter
(https://twitter.com/freemarker), and probably will use the same logo
in the future elsewhere too.

Which one do you prefer from the *top* row (1, 2, 3)?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNLU0wQmFiUElFc2c

(The bottom row is for file icons, but currently we won't use them
anywhere.)

Thanks for Julien Nicolas for providing these!

Re: Proposed Tweet re: Logo Vote

[Jacques Le Roux]

Yes that's a good idea, let's see if it helps it get more opinions, we can't 
presume

Jacques


Le 19/01/2017 à 12:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

+1
I like it, thanks

Il 19 Gen 2017 12:37 PM, "Sharan Foga"  ha scritto:


Hi Everyone

As we have a current vote in progress about the twitter logo, I'd like to
tweet about it and maybe get some additional involvement from the
freemarker twitter followers. The proposed tweet is as follow:

- Help us choose our new twitter logo. Check out the options and vote for
your favourite! https://s.apache.org/UuC1

What do people think?

Thanks
Sharan

Re: [VOTE] Which logo, now with a new contender (#1.5)

[Jacques Le Roux]

Sincerely I don't see the differences between 1.5 and 2.

Disclaimer: I'm a bit daltonian

Jacques


Le 19/01/2017 à 13:30, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

A new choice! So now in theory I should cancel this vote and start a
new one. But I guess we can be less formal in this case. After all,
changing a logo is backward compatible (an almost disturbing feeling
if you have maintained FM... <-; ).

I change my vote to +1 for #1.5.


Monday, January 16, 2017, 11:07:29 PM, Julien NICOLAS wrote:


Hello,

I prefer #1.

But... If I can provide a new one regarding comments
(https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNS2VaTDhCcDVLQTQ) I prefer
#1.5 ;)

Regards,

Julien.


On 16/01/2017 12:11, Daniel Dekany wrote:

We will replace our square logo at Twitter
(https://twitter.com/freemarker), and probably will use the same logo
in the future elsewhere too.

Which one do you prefer from the *top* row (1, 2, 3)?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNLU0wQmFiUElFc2c

(The bottom row is for file icons, but currently we won't use them
anywhere.)

Thanks for Julien Nicolas for providing these!

Re: Proposed Tweet re: Logo Vote

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 19/01/2017 à 18:23, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


...
(On the same time, the more technical questions remain unanswered. Not
surprisingly anyway, so it's fine, I was just surprised how many are
reading this list regularly, based on the number of vote answers.)


Yeah quite natural :-)

“the amount of discussion is inversely proportional to the complexity of
the topic that has been around for a long time”


See "the bike shed effect" for fun:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/201969/the-bike-shed-effect/

Jacopo



The bike shed effect happens also sometimes on important subjects I noticed, 
notably on OFBiz dev ML ;)

Jacques

Re: [VOTE] Which logo, now with a new contender (#1.5)

[Jacques Le Roux]

OK, I focused, and I still prefer 2 with its (very hard to see) paler shadow

Jacques


Le 19/01/2017 à 18:47, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Sincerely I don't see the differences between 1.5 and 2.

Disclaimer: I'm a bit daltonian

Jacques


Le 19/01/2017 à 13:30, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

A new choice! So now in theory I should cancel this vote and start a
new one. But I guess we can be less formal in this case. After all,
changing a logo is backward compatible (an almost disturbing feeling
if you have maintained FM... <-; ).

I change my vote to +1 for #1.5.


Monday, January 16, 2017, 11:07:29 PM, Julien NICOLAS wrote:


Hello,

I prefer #1.

But... If I can provide a new one regarding comments
(https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNS2VaTDhCcDVLQTQ) I prefer
#1.5 ;)

Regards,

Julien.


On 16/01/2017 12:11, Daniel Dekany wrote:

We will replace our square logo at Twitter
(https://twitter.com/freemarker), and probably will use the same logo
in the future elsewhere too.

Which one do you prefer from the *top* row (1, 2, 3)?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNLU0wQmFiUElFc2c

(The bottom row is for file icons, but currently we won't use them
anywhere.)

Thanks for Julien Nicolas for providing these!

Re: Proposed Tweet re: Logo Vote

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Julien

It's just a widely shared metaphor, I'm sure Jacopo was not thinking about the 
logo colour ;)

Jacques


Le 20/01/2017 à 09:19, Julien NICOLAS a écrit :

Hi Jacopo,

First, you have really said that choosing a new logo shape and colour is a minor decision ?! This is because you don't know the power of the good 
colour ! XD


Then, I understand the explanation of the bike shed effect but, I'm quite sure this is because of taste. If a problem need to be fixed, the 
community will found a technical solution without starting a discussion on the colour of the method ^^. Add a colour issue in this problem, and the 
thread will be longer ;)


Thanks for this sharing, I'll share it also :)

Julien.


On 19/01/2017 18:23, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


...
(On the same time, the more technical questions remain unanswered. Not
surprisingly anyway, so it's fine, I was just surprised how many are
reading this list regularly, based on the number of vote answers.)


Yeah quite natural :-)

“the amount of discussion is inversely proportional to the complexity of
the topic that has been around for a long time”


See "the bike shed effect" for fun:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/201969/the-bike-shed-effect/

Jacopo

Re: Proposed Tweet re: Logo Vote

[Jacques Le Roux]

I had a doubt, was 50/50 :D

Jacques


Le 20/01/2017 à 12:11, Julien NICOLAS a écrit :

Jacques, Jacopo,

I was joking of course ^_^

Julien.

PS : May the force of colours be with you!


On 20/01/2017 11:33, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Julien NICOLAS 
wrote:


Hi Jacopo,

First, you have really said that choosing a new logo shape and colour is a
minor decision ?! This is because you don't know the power of the good
colour ! XD


I didn't mean to say it is a *minor* decision! :-)
It is in fact an *important* decision that is probably easier to comment
than other more technical ones.

Regards,

Jacopo



Then, I understand the explanation of the bike shed effect but, I'm quite
sure this is because of taste. If a problem need to be fixed, the community
will found a technical solution without starting a discussion on the colour
of the method ^^. Add a colour issue in this problem, and the thread will
be longer ;)

Thanks for this sharing, I'll share it also :)

Julien.



On 19/01/2017 18:23, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Dekany 
wrote:

...

(On the same time, the more technical questions remain unanswered. Not
surprisingly anyway, so it's fine, I was just surprised how many are
reading this list regularly, based on the number of vote answers.)


Yeah quite natural :-)

“the amount of discussion is inversely proportional to the complexity of
the topic that has been around for a long time”


See "the bike shed effect" for fun:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/201969/the-bike-shed-effect/

Jacopo

Re: Proposed Tweet re: Logo Vote

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques


Le 20/01/2017 à 14:55, Julien NICOLAS a écrit :

Using Jira is really a good idea !!!

Julien.

On 20/01/2017 14:31, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

Interestingly, the official ASF Twitter account recently posted a tweet for
the Opennlp project that is similar to the one proposed by Sharan for
Freemarker

Jacopo

*Apache - The ASF* ‏@TheASF   52m52 minutes ago

More

Calling all creatives! @ApacheOpennlp 
is seeking a new logo! https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-6 …
 #machinelearning
 #logo
 #design
 #competition
 #newlook




On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sharan Foga  wrote:


Hi Everyone

As we have a current vote in progress about the twitter logo, I'd like to
tweet about it and maybe get some additional involvement from the
freemarker twitter followers. The proposed tweet is as follow:

- Help us choose our new twitter logo. Check out the options and vote for
your favourite! https://s.apache.org/UuC1

What do people think?

Thanks
Sharan

Re: [FM3] Getting rid of syntax autodetection?

[Jacques Le Roux]

I see no problems with that.

+1

Jacques


Le 16/01/2017 à 21:41, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I propose that we remove square bracket VS angle bracket tag syntax
([#...] VS <#...>) *autodetection* in FM3. Instead, the file
extensions should determine which one is used (by default). See
explanation below.

While we have undertaken this tricky task inside FM2, with that we
have pushed this complexity on others. Text editor plugins and IDE
plugins have hard time implementing this (months ago I have tried to
patch the Eclipse plugin to do it correctly, but I couldn't fully
solve it, because the tag syntax can change as you type).

Also, usually, a project either uses one tag syntax or the other. Or
at least they can tell ahead which templates should use which, because
hopefully they have a policy for that (like e-mails use this, web
pages that). So I guess autodetection is very rarely needed (and
hopefully almost never truly necessary).

So, I believe it would be a better compromise if we drop
autodetection, and instead by default [1] the file extension indicates
which tag syntax is used. Let's say, *.f3s* files use square bracket
syntax, and the others (usually *.fm3*) use the angle bracket syntax.
(The concrete file extension patterns aren't the point now.) Editors
can also easily map different file extensions to different syntaxes.

[1] Regarding that it's only "by default". In FM2 you can already
 define quite intricate rules that map template paths to various
 configuration settings that will be applied on the matching
 template (including the tag syntax). (See
 http://freemarker.org/docs/pgui_config_templateconfigurations.html
 if you don't know this feature.) There's also the
 recognizeStandardFileExtensions configuration setting, with which
 you can disable the file extension magic.

Re: [FM3] Dropping support before Servlet 2.5 / JSP 2.1. Or even before 3.0/2.2?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 21/01/2017 à 01:54, David E Jones a écrit :

On Jan 20 2017, at 7:26 am, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


We might even want to require Servlet 3.0 and JSP 2.2, from Java EE 6
(December 10, 2009), just to make things easier in the future, though

at the moment we don't utilize that.

   


This seems very reasonable. It goes back quite a few years and is one version
back from the current version (JEE 7, Servlet 3.1, JSP 2.3; looks like since
June 2013).

   


-David

   




+1

Jacques

Re: [FM3] Switching to camel case, supporting only that

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 21/01/2017 à 12:28, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Saturday, January 21, 2017, 8:50:48 AM, Denis Bredelet wrote:


Hi Daniel,


FM2 traditionally uses a weird naming convention, where directive
names are all-lower-case (like #elseif), and other names use snake
case (like ?upper_case or date_format). For a while it also supports
camel case (you just use it in the template, like ?upperCase, #elseIf,
etc., and it switches to that mode automatically).

I belive camel case is the clear winner, because the names in the
data-model are almost always also use that, since in the Java world
that's the norm (also in the JavaScript world BTW).

I propose that FM3 should only support the camel case variation. (Note
that this only affect the names defined by FreeMarker, not the names
coming from the data-model.) That yet again simplifies tooling too.

Any thoughts?

-1 for supporting only camel case

I would just keep supporting all existing variations.

Note that this is for FM3, where the template syntax isn't compatible
with FM2 anyway.


Justification:

Camel case makes sense as you described, so it would be good to support that.

Directives like #elseif in the template will give an error if you
support only camel case. This is user hostile and I think we should
keep supporting the lower case variant.

If everything is camel case, then as one would expect, #elseIf is that
too. I think it's easy to grasp for the users (otherwise the error
message will tell them quickly). Note sure why it's user hostile. Or
if it's a bit that for some reason, if sparing that worths being
inconsistent with the naming convention of the data-model and of the
whole Java world really. (Maybe I'm more a purist that the average
users, but inconsistency like that irritates me.)

(BTW, in FM2, if you start using camel case in a template, it will not
accept #elseif either, only #elseIf.)


For built-ins, it is not entirely necessary to have snake case
variants.

Technically it's not necessary, but why it's not desirable? I mean,
you got `foo.someProperty` and `foo.someMethod()`, because that's how
they are in the data-model. You can't help that, that's given. And
then suddenly you have a `foo?some_stuff`. It looks inconsistent, and
as a user you have to switch back and forth your brain between camel
case more and snake case mode (and all-lower mode).


I don't like case inconsistencies in source code and I don't like snake case 
for operators.
Using it for upper-cased CONSTANT is the only case (pun no intended) I can bear 
with it


But if we have camel case then we should also support the all-lower case 
variant,

All-lower is perhaps the worse accident in FM1-2 syntax. First of all,
it's the least legible one of the three. Secondly, there the template
language isn't even consistent with itself, as it's only used for
directive names.


as above. I believe that snake case helps legibility.


I don't think so. It's an old habit coming from old languages (COBOL, Fortran, you_name_it) and I don't find it legible at all. I farPreferCamelCase, 
but that is a moo point I guess.

The most important is to remove the burden of having to deal with all the 
variants.


Some "ecosystem" goes for snake case, some for all-lower case, and the
one we belong to (Java, even JavaScript on the Web designer side) is
pretty consistently uses camel case. I believe there's value in
consistency within the ecosystem you belong to. Also I think the more
syntax variations we support, the more confusing it is for the users
(think about the official documentation, or copy-pasting from
StackOverflow and other forums). Also having one variation simplifies
tooling and last not least FreeMarker itself. So, supporting 2 or even
3 variations has a quite high price, and I want to see what we gain in
exchange, too see if it worths it. So more concrete arguments are
welcome.


Examples:
support for ?jsString, ?jsstring and maybe also ?js_string
support for ?lastIndexOf, ?lastindexof and maybe also ?last_index_of

Configuration settings can be strictly camel case since they are
used by the programmers, not end users.

Because of #setting and some special variables they are also visible
to template authors. Also note that very often the template author is
a programmer too. Often even the same person.


Snake and all-lower cases: YAGNI I'd say. Once you use only one casing  (CamelCase FTW) method, things are much simpler, for maintenance years later 
for instance, but not only


Jacques





Cheers,

— Denis.


Also, for the configuration setting names we should only support camel
case too (FM2 supports both). Those are used outside templates too,
like when you load the configuration from *.properties.

Of course, if someone uses a snake case name, we would tell in the
error messages that names are camel case since 3.0.0.

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: FreeMarker Project Maturity Model Assessment

[Jacques Le Roux]

Well done guys!

I have yet not much to say about LC20/LC30 but I'll have a look

For QU30 we can easily ask infra to create a security ML.
For the wiki page at least a link to 
http://www.apache.org/security/#vulnerability-handling would help.
Note that for instance OFBiz only links to its security ML from 
http://www.apache.org/security/projects.html

BTW out of subject and it's maybe late for OFBiz (was not a requirement then), but why not creating a such page for OFBiz (I already suggested so 
months ago w/o answers)?


Jacques

Le 21/01/2017 à 11:39, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


Michael and I did our first pass at the Project's Maturity Model document:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FREEMARKER/Apache+Freemarker+Project+Maturity+Model

I think it is pretty much complete and clearly shows that this project is
based on healthy foundations and governed according to The Apache Way.
It would be nice if any of you could help adding some more details to the
questions LC20 and LC30, and in general your comments/edits are welcome!

Thanks,

Jacopo

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi all,

I have created a wiki page (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/KBUIB)
inspired by the Apache ranger example and added the first responses for a
start.

Feel free to add, edit, remark. Any help is appreciated.

Regards,

Michael


Am 07.01.17 um 16:55 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:


Hi all,


in preparation to the FreeMarker project's graduation, it would be useful
to prepare the Project Maturity Model Assessment.

For more information on the Project Maturity Model see:
http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html

This is an example of the answers provided by a project that is under
graduation vote now:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/RANGER/Apache+
Ranger+Project+Maturity+Model

This is not mandatory, but I think that taking time to diligently complete
the answers may be useful for this project both as an internal assessment
and as a document that we will share to the Incubator PMC when they will
be
called to vote for the graduation.

What do you think?
Any volunteer to create a page in our wiki that we could use to work at
the
document together?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Any news about this? Somebody contacted them?

It would help to push INFRA-13246

Thanks

Jacques


Le 03/01/2017 à 13:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Probably there will be a higher chance for positive answer if we can
offer running the service too. Because I guess that's a burden for
them, while owning a piece of software on GitHub is not, that's just
good PR.


Tuesday, January 3, 2017, 12:53:12 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online


Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: Using Social Media to Help Promote Freemarker

[Jacques Le Roux]

I believe baby steps would help, as Sharan suggested, a 1st simple version to 
start the thing...

Jacques


Le 07/01/2017 à 23:03, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

On more thing... the hard part in an evaluator tool is defining the
data-model. On freemarker-online that's a very limited due to security
reasons. In a tool that the user runs on his on computer though, it's
not a problem to allow defining values in Groovy for example.


Saturday, January 7, 2017, 6:45:10 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


Saturday, January 7, 2017, 4:37:12 PM, Denis Bredelet wrote:

[snip]

These are some getting started examples. What are your ideas about the
final product?

I am thinking of adding a « main » function in the FreeMarker JAR
to load a template and a model (as XML or properties, that is why I
showed the link). Then create a separate JAR with the UI to load the
template and datamodel from the filesystem or define a datamodel
interactively, and save the processed template in a file.

The whole functionality, even if it's only a console app with a main
method, should be in a separate jar, and certainly even in a separate
project (like we have freemarker-site, freemarker-docgen, and then we
could have freemarker-tester or something). Since dependency
management has become common place, it's considered to be a bad
practice to overpack your jar-s. In fact, something that we consider
to do in FM3 is exploding freemarker.jar into submodules (like
freemarker-servet.jar, etc.). Back then it was more practical to make
a big monolithic jar, but times are changing.

Also, a separate project (again, still under the umbrella of
FreeMarker and Apache) means that you can do releases independently of
the FreeMarker (the engine) project releases.

Also note that "main" methods in a library are seen as security
problems nowadays. We already have a bunch of them in freemarker.jar,
and I'm just waiting for the right moment to get rid of them.

So, yeah, I say, separate jar, separate project.

Re: For Manual and Site DocBook editing: XXE has free edition again

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 02/07/2016 à 10:29, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Very long ago I have started using XMLmind XML Editor (XXE) free
edition for editing our Manual and other DocBook material (like our
web site). Others were supposed to use that as well, though most of
the editing was done by me anyway (originally I was the documentation
guy here, and did very little coding). Unfortunately, one day they
have stopped doing free releases, and I never figured out what to
migrate to (esp. as I have a license anyway, and other FM developers
will probably get on too if they ask for it). Anyway, I'm happy to
notice that they have a free edition again, intended for open source
projects and for personal use, and it doesn't even miss any features
that we need: http://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/download.shtml


Interesting I'll try to have a look... So that's still what you use to generate 
the (very good!) documentation at http://freemarker.org/ ?

Jacques

Re: For Manual and Site DocBook editing: XXE has free edition again

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 21/01/2017 à 16:17, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Saturday, January 21, 2017, 3:08:57 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 02/07/2016 à 10:29, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Very long ago I have started using XMLmind XML Editor (XXE) free
edition for editing our Manual and other DocBook material (like our
web site). Others were supposed to use that as well, though most of
the editing was done by me anyway (originally I was the documentation
guy here, and did very little coding). Unfortunately, one day they
have stopped doing free releases, and I never figured out what to
migrate to (esp. as I have a license anyway, and other FM developers
will probably get on too if they ask for it). Anyway, I'm happy to
notice that they have a free edition again, intended for open source
projects and for personal use, and it doesn't even miss any features
that we need: http://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/download.shtml


Interesting I'll try to have a look... So that's still what you use
to generate the (very good!) documentation at http://freemarker.org/

It's used for *editing* the Manual
(http://freemarker.org/docs/index.html) and the "home page" (site)
http://freemarker.org/. That's two DocBook XML-s. Docgen (our internal
product) generates the HTML from it.

OK thanks, I did not know for Docgen

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 21/01/2017 à 16:11, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Nope (as far as I know)... I was hoping that INFRA-13246 will have
some kind of positive feedback first, but it seems it has to be the
other way around then.

Anyway, have you seen and reactions on our proposal? In case you have
met someone face to face or something...


I must say I'm reluctant to push the request more w/o nothing in hand, or at least nothing more to say (like we contacted them, we begin to work on 
it, etc., ie some action engaged)


Jacques




Saturday, January 21, 2017, 3:00:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Any news about this? Somebody contacted them?

It would help to push INFRA-13246

Thanks

Jacques


Le 03/01/2017 à 13:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Probably there will be a higher chance for positive answer if we can
offer running the service too. Because I guess that's a burden for
them, while owning a piece of software on GitHub is not, that's just
good PR.


Tuesday, January 3, 2017, 12:53:12 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online


Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 21/01/2017 à 17:58, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Saturday, January 21, 2017, 5:17:33 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 21/01/2017 à 16:11, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Nope (as far as I know)... I was hoping that INFRA-13246 will have
some kind of positive feedback first, but it seems it has to be the
other way around then.

Anyway, have you seen and reactions on our proposal? In case you have
met someone face to face or something...

I must say I'm reluctant to push the request more w/o nothing in
hand, or at least nothing more to say (like we contacted them, we begin to work 
on
it, etc., ie some action engaged)

OK, I will ask Kenshoo (the owner of freemarker-online) now...


Thanks I'm sure this will help

Jacques




Jacques



Saturday, January 21, 2017, 3:00:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Any news about this? Somebody contacted them?

It would help to push INFRA-13246

Thanks

Jacques


Le 03/01/2017 à 13:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Probably there will be a higher chance for positive answer if we can
offer running the service too. Because I guess that's a burden for
them, while owning a piece of software on GitHub is not, that's just
good PR.


Tuesday, January 3, 2017, 12:53:12 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online


Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: FreeMarker Project Maturity Model Assessment

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 23/01/2017 à 16:00, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


I have just went ahead and published what you have written on the site
(with some minor edits).

The related pages:
http://freemarker.org/report-security-vulnerabilities.html
And I have also added this:
http://freemarker.org/committer-howto.html#handle-security-vulnerabilities

I have also updated the wiki page to to refer to these under QU30, and
set its status to YES.


Thanks, they look great to me.

Jacopo


+1

Jacques

Re: About a Freemarker template evaluator service

[Jacques Le Roux]

Done, good news :)

Jacques


Le 08/02/2017 à 15:03, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

They say the are will to donate the freemarker-online source code to
ASF. Does someone want to help out with the paper work, like sending
them the file to fill and sign and post, etc.?

I have also posted to INFRA-13246 about this, but couldn't change the
status to "wariting for infra". Jacques, do you have the right to do
that?


Saturday, January 21, 2017, 6:48:15 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 21/01/2017 à 17:58, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Saturday, January 21, 2017, 5:17:33 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 21/01/2017 à 16:11, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Nope (as far as I know)... I was hoping that INFRA-13246 will have
some kind of positive feedback first, but it seems it has to be the
other way around then.

Anyway, have you seen and reactions on our proposal? In case you have
met someone face to face or something...

I must say I'm reluctant to push the request more w/o nothing in
hand, or at least nothing more to say (like we contacted them, we begin to work 
on
it, etc., ie some action engaged)

OK, I will ask Kenshoo (the owner of freemarker-online) now...

Thanks I'm sure this will help

Jacques


Jacques


Saturday, January 21, 2017, 3:00:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Any news about this? Somebody contacted them?

It would help to push INFRA-13246

Thanks

Jacques


Le 03/01/2017 à 13:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Probably there will be a higher chance for positive answer if we can
offer running the service too. Because I guess that's a burden for
them, while owning a piece of software on GitHub is not, that's just
good PR.


Tuesday, January 3, 2017, 12:53:12 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 03/01/2017 à 09:32, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

a couple of days ago Daniel brought to my attention the site/service:

http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/

They provide a nice online tool to evaluate any Freemarker template by
providing the template code and its context.

Wouldn't be nice is we could offer that or a similar service to the users
and potential adopters of Freemarker? I think it would be a very useful
tool and also a good mechanism to attract new consumers.

If there is an interest in this community then we could move in two
directions:

1) get in touch with the maintainers of freemarker-online and see if they
are interested to contribute their work [*] or join our community and help
to build a similar one here; if they are not interested then we could
discuss if it would make sense to build our own here

2) get in touch with the Infra team and explore the possibility to set up a
virtual machine to dedicated to our project that we could use to deploy a
similar service, from our official website

I can volunteer to try to get in touch with them (#1); any volunteers for
#2 (or even #1)?

Kind regards,

Jacopo

[*] which is licensed with the AL2.0 and available here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online


Hi Jacopo,

I can take care of 2, I'm used to these kind of things for OFBiz
I guess 1 is a prerequisite and I'm not well placed for this task.

Jacques

Re: New committer: Woonsan Ko

[Jacques Le Roux]

Welcome Woonsan!

Jacques


Le 12/02/2017 à 19:42, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache FreeMarker
(incubating) has invited Woonsan Ko to become a committer and we are
pleased to announce that he has accepted.

Woonsan Ko has been an active FreeMarker user for years while using
FreeMarker as primary template engine for web content management
applications. He is willing to contribute more and help the Apache
FreeMarker community more proactively. He is working at Hippo, a
BloomReach company, as a lead solution architect. He has been
contributing to Apache Portals and Apache Commons SCXML projects as
well for years.

Being a committer enables easier contribution to the project since
there is no need to go via the patch submission process. This should
enable better productivity.

Re: [FM3] Remove some deprecated FTL constructs

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 22/02/2017 à 10:06, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I would like to remove these deprecated FM2 FTL constructs in FM3:

- #escape, #no_escape (recently deprecated in favor of 
http://freemarker.org/docs/dgui_misc_autoescaping.html)
- .template_name in favor of .current_template_name (there's also 
.main_template_name)
- http://freemarker.org/docs/ref_depr_numerical_interpolation.html
- http://freemarker.org/docs/ref_depr_directive.html
- http://freemarker.org/docs/ref_depr_builtin.html

Any thoughts?


Since they are deprecated I agree they should be removed.

Jacques

Re: Feature question FM2 / FM3: Hook into loops

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 for timeout

Jacques


Le 24/02/2017 à 01:12, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

There's a hidden feature in FreeMarker 2 that allows templates be
interrupted with Thread.interrupt(). This can be used to limit the
template execution time (one thread processes the template, the other
waits for it to finish with a timeout, and then interrupts the
template processing thread). To see this in action, go to
http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/ and enter some very long loop.
The processing will be aborted with timeout. The related part of the
source code is around here:
https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online/blob/master/src/main/java/com/kenshoo/freemarker/services/FreeMarkerService.java#L123

That's the closes I can think of right now. But I'm open to ideas,
because this used to be concern if you allow users to write templates.

The problem with limiting #list iterations is that you can nest
#list-s into each other, so it's easy to square, cube, etc. your
iteration limit. (There are other fun ways of doing infinitely running
templates too, like with recursion. That's why simply measuring how
long the template is running is certainly the most robust solution.)

If you have some collections that you know shouldn't be fully listed,
then perhaps you should wrap those into your own TemplateSequenceModel
implementation.


Thursday, February 23, 2017, 3:14:06 PM, Christoph Rüger wrote:


We would like to hook into loops (<#list>) to e.g. count the number of
iterations and react based on some business conditions. For example stop
with an Exception after 10k iterations.

I would think about some kind of callback which we can register which is
called by freemarker inside <#list> iterations, so that our callback code
can do whatever is needed.

Is something like that possible already (haven't checked code yet) or
planned for FM3?

Thanks
Christoph

Re: [FM3] Rename encoding to charset, use Charset instead of String

[Jacques Le Roux]

I agree on all points

Jacques


Le 24/03/2017 à 15:50, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Tuesday, March 21, 2017, 3:31:56 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote:


+1 on both.

Furthermore, as the "encoding" parameter of
getTemplate/#include/#import was removed in FM3, the
locale-to-encoding map (`Configuration.setEncoding(Locale, String)`)
was also removed. So now it should just be `charset`, not
`defaultCharset` (similarly as we have Template.charset). However,
that name is still pretty bad, as it doesn't tell if the charset of
what it is. It's the charset of the the template file when we read it.
So, maybe, it should be "sourceCharset"?

Yes, "sourceCharset" helps clarify the meaning, indeed!

Cheers,

Woonsan


Woonsan

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

We have this retro terminology where instead of charset we say
encoding. (I understand that encoding has a wider meaning, but we only
intend to support encoding/decoding via a charset.) So I think
cfg.setDefaultEncoding and <#ftl encoding=...> and such should be
renamed to cfg.setDefaultCharset and <#ftl charset=...>.

Also, in the Java API-s we should use Charset instead of a String
(java.nio.charset.Charset didn't exist when FM 2.3 was created).

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany


--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: New ASF Member from FreeMarker Community

[Jacques Le Roux]

This is a very good news and clearly deserved for the work at the ASF and all 
the work which led to the ASF!

In other words, thanks for you work Daniel, and having picked the ASF for the 
Freemarker project :)

Jacques


Le 05/04/2017 à 09:09, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Good news: Daniel Dekany from the FreeMarker community has been invited to
become member of the Apache Software Foundation.

Many congratulations Daniel!!!

Jacopo

Re: https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-online-tester/pull/3

[Jacques Le Roux]

Note also that this issue is not yet resolved. So I would wait a decision 
before taking action, that's the decision we took in OFBiz PMC.

Even if there are high probabilities that it will not eventually be allowed (time are changing), AFAIK there are currently no bylaws preventing to 
release jars in a product.


Jacques


Le 26/04/2017 à 14:43, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

That's a good point. So then it can remain as is for now. We only have
to remember this if it ever produce a release (because all we need is
deploying the service, an no release is needed for that).

And then I guess then we don't have to include gradlew.jar in the
LICENSE either.


Wednesday, April 26, 2017, 2:24:25 PM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:


We are facing the same issue in OFBiz. However! What I understood is that
you cannot include the binary in the release, but you can include it in
trunk/development branch which is where you need it mostly.

On Apr 26, 2017 3:21 PM, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:


As it turns out, we aren't supposed to commit gradlew.jar (or any
binary except images and such):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-288

Furthermore, if it the tester has releases (it might won't have), we
clearly aren't allowed to include that jar.

So, we have to describe how to install Gradle manually instead.


Thursday, April 6, 2017, 12:52:48 PM, Pradeep Murugesan wrote:


Hi Daniel,


Thanks for merging it.


I have opened another pull request(#4). which contains


  1. additional files with license headers

  2. removed the "created by" signature from the source code



Also I am not sure about the license information for gradle wrapper
binary located at
incubator-freemarker-online-tester/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar.
I have looked in another apache project
https://github.com/apache/aurora. They have not mentioned the wrapper

jar in any files.


Kindly let me know if we need to add it. I also see no license
information associated with the binary, but the gradle source is
bearing the apache license
(https://github.com/gradle/gradle/blob/master/subprojects/wrapper/src/

integTest/groovy/org/gradle/integtests/AbstractWrapperIntegrationSpec
.groovy).


As a next step, I would change the package names and the cdn for the

javascript files.


Thank you.

Pradeep.




From: Daniel Dekany 
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 10:52:59 PM
To: Pradeep Murugesan
Subject: Re:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-online-tester/pull/3

Wednesday, April 5, 2017, 10:13:50 PM, Pradeep Murugesan wrote:


Hi Daniel,

changed the license headers for all the files. There were few files
which I thought the license header is not necessary as they are the
external libraries used by the project. Have issued a pull request for

these.

Thanks, I will look into it promptly.


Files that doesn't have a license now

DISCLAIMER
gradlew
gradlew.bat

gradle/wrapper

   *   gradle-wrapper.jar
   *   gradle-wrapper.properties

src/main/resources/assets/js

   *   autosize.min.js
   *   jquery.autosize.min.js
   *   jquery.blockUI.js

Kindly let me know if any of the above files need the license

information.

Yes, all files must have license information somewhere, except
DISCLAIMER, LICENSE and NOTICE. While it's preferable, the license
header is not mandatory (and for binary files we can't have it
anyway), except for non-binary files that are covered by the usual ASF
ASLv2 license. Regardless, the LICENSE file in the root should give an
overview of all the licenses used, and for the non-ASF licenses show
which files/directories are covered by that license. (Also, ASF
licensed binary files, if we have any, has to be mentioned explicitly,
because they can't have a header.) You can see these in action in the
FreeMarker distros (note that the source and binary distribution has
different LICENSE).

As of the jquery files, we should not store those. We should use a
googleapis.com URL or wherever CDN people use nowadays to load JQuery.
Then they won't complicate the LICENSE anymore (and won't burden our
web server).


Will do the package renaming as part of the next pull request. It would

be easier to track.

Right.



Pradeep.

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany


--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: FreeMarker Online Tester legal status and hosting

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 02/05/2017 à 13:23, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Tuesday, May 2, 2017, 12:19:47 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


We have received the source code donation of said service form
Kenshoo. Pradeep has changed the license headers and renamed the
packages, and did some other cleanup. While we plan to do further
development, the service works, and should be deployed to somewhere,
so that it can take over from http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/.

Can someone help in moving this issue ahead:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13246 "Create a demo VM
for the Freemarker project". Infra has certainly no right to decide if
we can receive such a resource, and we should bringing this up on the
right forum. On incubator-general is guess.

Also, anyone is aware of any legal obstacle that prevents deploying
this service to Apache infrastructure?


I don't and I think we can proceed to contact infra to setup the instance
and work with them to resolve any possible technical concern.

But Infra doesn't progress with that issue. It was created on January
the 7th. I have added a new comment now (though it's "Internal", so I
don't know if you see it):

   What's need for this issue to progress? We could deploy the service
   right now if we had a virtual machine. Ideally, it should be visible
   under http://freemarker.org/tester/ (ASF owns the freemarker.org
   domain), or http://tester.freemarker.org/.


It is great to see such a great progress on this, kudos!

Jacopo

I will ask infra on Hipchat, a nudge often works ;)

Jacques

Re: Tester web page domain?

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 for try.f.o

Jacques


Le 07/06/2017 à 19:36, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

We need to chose a domain name that replaces
http://freemarker-online.kenshoo.com/. I have asked for this (as
opposed to the original http://tester.freemarker.org/):
http://try.freemarker.org/. Any opinions (before Infra implements the
last...)?

Re: [PPMC] Re: Proposed policy change: Don't require CLA from contributos

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 04/08/2017 à 16:48, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Dear PPCM members, please tell me if you agree, or there's any problem.

John D. Ament had some concerns (see his "Is Freemarker becoming too
process heavy?" thread), but he didn't follow through when I asked
back.

Anyway, why I want this is that even if very rarely, sometimes we get
very trivial contribution like this recently:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/pull/29
If I will ask the guy to send a ICLA, you know... I'm certain that if
I just merge such things without any of you agree, Legal can't say a
bad word, but still, I would prefer if you say something.


We can definitely accept these minor contributions without much concerns.

Jacopo


+1 for minor contribs.

Jacques

Re: Preparing for 2.3.27 - please check the change log

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 20/09/2017 à 20:13, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

We have quite a few bug fixes piled up, so I it's time for a new
release. There's a few very minor new feature as well (mostly in
response to issues raised on StackOverflow). Please review them, also
tell if you want some more changes to get into 2.3.27!

Here's the change log (so far):
http://freemarker.org/builds/fm2.3.27/versions_2_3_27.html

I plan to start the usual release process early next week.


Hi Daniel,

Thanks for this release notes, really interesting. Nothing else to say.

Jacques

Re: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 22/09/2017 à 22:22, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Google doesn't like plain HTTP sites as we know (SEO), also I hear
that starting from October they want to show warning in Chrome if you
have forms on your page. We do have forms... On all page under
http://freemarker.org/docs/ there's a search field, and
http://try.freemarker.org/ is nothing but a form.

Anyone want to tackle this? Or part of this?


I did that for OFBiz. I can have a look before October.

Jacques

Re: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 23/09/2017 à 08:44, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, September 22, 2017, 11:17:59 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 22/09/2017 à 22:22, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Google doesn't like plain HTTP sites as we know (SEO), also I hear
that starting from October they want to show warning in Chrome if you
have forms on your page. We do have forms... On all page under
http://freemarker.org/docs/ there's a search field, and
http://try.freemarker.org/ is nothing but a form.

Anyone want to tackle this? Or part of this?


I did that for OFBiz. I can have a look before October.

That would be great, thanks!


Jacques



Sorry, OFBiz still being my priority, I was not able to do it yet. But I should 
be able to start this week, most likely Monday...

Jacques

Re: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 01/10/2017 à 23:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Sunday, October 1, 2017, 8:26:53 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 23/09/2017 à 08:44, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, September 22, 2017, 11:17:59 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 22/09/2017 à 22:22, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Google doesn't like plain HTTP sites as we know (SEO), also I hear
that starting from October they want to show warning in Chrome if you
have forms on your page. We do have forms... On all page under
http://freemarker.org/docs/ there's a search field, and
http://try.freemarker.org/ is nothing but a form.

Anyone want to tackle this? Or part of this?


I did that for OFBiz. I can have a look before October.

That would be great, thanks!


Jacques



Sorry, OFBiz still being my priority, I was not able to do it yet.
But I should be able to start this week, most likely Monday...

No problem, and thanks for keep us informed!


Jacques

Sorry again, my current contract has changed and I'll not be available before 
November
I'm though trying the new release in OFBiz right now, so far all seems OK :)

Jacques

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache FreeMarker 2.3.27 (incubating)

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 (binding PPMC member)

SHA1 OK, tests OFBiz OK, small navigation  in OFBiz (front and back ends) OK

Jacques


Le 16/10/2017 à 21:30, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

Hi all,

Please vote on releasing FreeMarker 2.3.27-incubating! If this voting
passes, another similar voting will be started on
gene...@incubator.apache.org, and if that passes too, then we can
release this version.

Note that because there weren't many deep changes since
2.3.26-incubating, we have no Release Candidate this time. Thus, it's
important that you don't skip testing this release with your dependent
projects.

Release Notes:
http://freemarker.org/builds/2.3.27-voting/documentation/_html/versions_2_3_27.html

Before proceed, you should know that FreeMarker 2.3.x, for a long
time, always releases a normal and a "gae" variant on the same time,
which are technically two independent source trees (Git branches). The
"gae" variant contains a few small modification in the Java source
code to be Google App Engine compliant, and has freemarker-gae as the
Maven artifact name. Otherwise the normal and the "gae" branches are
identical. Hence they will be voted on together.

The commits to be voted upon are:
- Normal (non-gae) variant:
   
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker.git;a=commit;h=8e501b8ab83fb7d312791a4907ca94ef8acaf3e5
   Commit hash: 8e501b8ab83fb7d312791a4907ca94ef8acaf3e5
- "gae" variant:
   
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker.git;a=commit;h=cf2ae45d174d07a38d096958a44977cb79b1a68d
   Commit hash: cf2ae45d174d07a38d096958a44977cb79b1a68d

The artifacts to be voted upon are located here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.27-incubating/source/
where the source release artifacts are:
- Normal (non-gae) variant:
   apache-freemarker-2.3.27-incubating-src.tar.gz
- "gae" variant:
   apache-freemarker-gae-2.3.27-incubating-src.tar.gz

See the README inside them for build instructions!

The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0xA25D65D27C13ADCE

Note that for convenience, we also provide binaries:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.27-incubating/binaries/
and Maven artifacts in the ASF staging repositories:
- 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/org/freemarker/freemarker/2.3.27-incubating/
- 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/org/freemarker/freemarker-gae/2.3.27-incubating/

Please try out the package and vote!

The vote is open for a minimum of 72 hours or until the necessary number of
votes (3 binding +1s) is reached.

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache FreeMarker 2.3.27-incubating
[ ]  0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...

Please add "(binding)" if your vote is binding.


Woonsan Ko
on behalf of the Apache FreeMarker project team

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache FreeMarker 2.3.27 (incubating)

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 20/10/2017 à 15:36, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, October 20, 2017, 12:29:19 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


+1 (binding PPMC member)

You meant IPMC member there. (You aren't in the FreeMarker PPMC.)


Right and sorry :)

Jacques

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache FreeMarker 2.3.27-incubating released

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thank you Woonsan, Daniel and the FreeMarker community at large for your efforts

Greatly appreciated, kudos !

Jacques


Le 04/11/2017 à 08:45, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Congratulations!

Jacopo

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 1:20 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Thank you Woonsan!

Anything to improve on the release process itself, and on its
documentation? (I did some updates in the how-to, on the places where
you had questions, so apart from those.)


Friday, November 3, 2017, 2:34:34 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote:


The Apache FreeMarker (incubating) community is pleased to announce
the release of Apache FreeMarker 2.3.27 (incubating).

Change log:
http://freemarker.org/docs/versions_2_3_27.html

You can get binary and source packages from here:
http://freemarker.org/freemarkerdownload.html

Or with Maven:

   
 org.freemarker
 freemarker
 2.3.27-incubating
   

Disclaimer: Apache FreeMarker is an effort undergoing incubation at
The Apache Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache
Incubator . Incubation is required of
all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates that the
infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have
stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects.
While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.


Woonsan Ko
on behalf of Apache FreeMarker Podling Project Management Committee


--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 04/11/2017 à 11:52, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The freemarker.org domain is now changed to (HTTP 301 redirects to)
freemarker.apache.org, so that this won't stand in the way of
graduation. (The change was submitted to Google Webmasters Tools and
Google Custom Search as well; it may take a while until that will have
effect.)

Works already here

Jacques


The try.freemarker.org domain is not yet changed. I'm not sure if that
will be a problem during graduation. (I'm somewhat reluctant to do
changes until we know what our domain will be. Like in case we can't
be TLP but a subproject, we can't use freemarker.apache.org, I guess.)


Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 11:20:36 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:


There is no requirement that you ever get rid of the freemarker.org
domain. This is not the first project to have its own domain.


Exactly. For example OFBiz owns the ofbiz.org domain since before the
graduation (2006) and since then the ASF has maintained the redirection to
the canonical ofbiz.apache.org.

Jacopo

Re: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Michael,

Yes this was the start of this discussion https://s.apache.org/JFBa :)

freemarker.apache.org is pupettized. I see 2 places where it's referenced

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/nodes/themis.apache.org.eyaml

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/nodes/tlp-eu-mid.apache.org.eyaml

AFAIK, we don't need to change anything there or we will see later

But in order to use a letsencrypt certificate we need to change

 
https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet.git/data/nodes/freemarker-vm.apache.org.yaml

I'm looking at it and let you know if I need some help

Thanks

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 11:24, Riehemann, Michael a écrit :

Hi!

I just checked freemarker.org and the redirection to freemarker.apache.org 
works. But I would suggest to change the 301 to HTTPS too!
All links on the website and the documentation are http links instead of https.
It would be nice to redirect everything to https.
If you need any help or some Pull-Request, just give me a hint.

Thank you,
Michael

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 4. November 2017 13:07
An: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: 
Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

Le 04/11/2017 à 11:52, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The freemarker.org domain is now changed to (HTTP 301 redirects to)
freemarker.apache.org, so that this won't stand in the way of
graduation. (The change was submitted to Google Webmasters Tools and
Google Custom Search as well; it may take a while until that will have
effect.)

Works already here

Jacques

The try.freemarker.org domain is not yet changed. I'm not sure if that
will be a problem during graduation. (I'm somewhat reluctant to do
changes until we know what our domain will be. Like in case we can't
be TLP but a subproject, we can't use freemarker.apache.org, I guess.)


Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 11:20:36 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Ralph Goers

wrote:


There is no requirement that you ever get rid of the freemarker.org
domain. This is not the first project to have its own domain.


Exactly. For example OFBiz owns the ofbiz.org domain since before the
graduation (2006) and since then the ASF has maintained the
redirection to the canonical ofbiz.apache.org.

Jacopo

Re: AW: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

I have created 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-15476

For that...

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 21:09, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Thanks! When we have a certificate installed, it will be merged.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 7:23:54 PM, Riehemann, Michael wrote:


I openend 2 pull-requests with the changes for you (since
https://freemarker.apache.org/ works fine for me):

https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/pull/38
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/pull/7


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Daniel Dekany [mailto:ddek...@apache.org]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 15:36
An: Jacques Le Roux 
Betreff: Re: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org
now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

As of the links on the web pages, they are generated based on
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/manual/en_US/docgen.cjson
and
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/blob/master/src/main/docgen/docgen.cjson,
so we can update them easily.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 3:15:56 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Hi Michael,

Yes this was the start of this discussion https://s.apache.org/JFBa :)

freemarker.apache.org is pupettized. I see 2 places where it's
referenced

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/themis.apache.org.eyaml

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/tlp-eu-mid.apache.org.eyaml

AFAIK, we don't need to change anything there or we will see later

But in order to use a letsencrypt certificate we need to change

  
https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet.git/data/nodes/freemar

ker-vm.apache.org.yaml

I'm looking at it and let you know if I need some help

Thanks

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 11:24, Riehemann, Michael a écrit :

Hi!

I just checked freemarker.org and the redirection to freemarker.apache.org 
works. But I would suggest to change the 301 to HTTPS too!
All links on the website and the documentation are http links instead of https.
It would be nice to redirect everything to https.
If you need any help or some Pull-Request, just give me a hint.

Thank you,
Michael

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 4. November 2017 13:07
An: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: 
Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

Le 04/11/2017 à 11:52, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The freemarker.org domain is now changed to (HTTP 301 redirects to)
freemarker.apache.org, so that this won't stand in the way of
graduation. (The change was submitted to Google Webmasters Tools and
Google Custom Search as well; it may take a while until that will
have
effect.)

Works already here

Jacques

The try.freemarker.org domain is not yet changed. I'm not sure if
that will be a problem during graduation. (I'm somewhat reluctant to
do changes until we know what our domain will be. Like in case we
can't be TLP but a subproject, we can't use freemarker.apache.org, I
guess.)


Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 11:20:36 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Ralph Goers

wrote:


There is no requirement that you ever get rid of the
freemarker.org domain. This is not the first project to have its own domain.


Exactly. For example OFBiz owns the ofbiz.org domain since before
the graduation (2006) and since then the ASF has maintained the
redirection to the canonical ofbiz.apache.org.

Jacopo



--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: AW: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

That https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15476 ?

Jacques


Le 10/11/2017 à 16:39, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I have no permission to see it.


Friday, November 10, 2017, 3:26:56 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


I have created
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-15476

For that...

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 21:09, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Thanks! When we have a certificate installed, it will be merged.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 7:23:54 PM, Riehemann, Michael wrote:


I openend 2 pull-requests with the changes for you (since
https://freemarker.apache.org/ works fine for me):

https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/pull/38
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/pull/7


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Daniel Dekany [mailto:ddek...@apache.org]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 15:36
An: Jacques Le Roux 
Betreff: Re: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org
now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

As of the links on the web pages, they are generated based on
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/manual/en_US/docgen.cjson
and
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/blob/master/src/main/docgen/docgen.cjson,
so we can update them easily.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 3:15:56 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Hi Michael,

Yes this was the start of this discussion https://s.apache.org/JFBa :)

freemarker.apache.org is pupettized. I see 2 places where it's
referenced

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/themis.apache.org.eyaml

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/tlp-eu-mid.apache.org.eyaml

AFAIK, we don't need to change anything there or we will see later

But in order to use a letsencrypt certificate we need to change

   
https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet.git/data/nodes/freemar

ker-vm.apache.org.yaml

I'm looking at it and let you know if I need some help

Thanks

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 11:24, Riehemann, Michael a écrit :

Hi!

I just checked freemarker.org and the redirection to freemarker.apache.org 
works. But I would suggest to change the 301 to HTTPS too!
All links on the website and the documentation are http links instead of https.
It would be nice to redirect everything to https.
If you need any help or some Pull-Request, just give me a hint.

Thank you,
Michael

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 4. November 2017 13:07
An: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: 
Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

Le 04/11/2017 à 11:52, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The freemarker.org domain is now changed to (HTTP 301 redirects to)
freemarker.apache.org, so that this won't stand in the way of
graduation. (The change was submitted to Google Webmasters Tools and
Google Custom Search as well; it may take a while until that will
have
effect.)

Works already here

Jacques

The try.freemarker.org domain is not yet changed. I'm not sure if
that will be a problem during graduation. (I'm somewhat reluctant to
do changes until we know what our domain will be. Like in case we
can't be TLP but a subproject, we can't use freemarker.apache.org, I
guess.)


Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 11:20:36 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Ralph Goers

wrote:


There is no requirement that you ever get rid of the
freemarker.org domain. This is not the first project to have its own domain.


Exactly. For example OFBiz owns the ofbiz.org domain since before
the graduation (2006) and since then the ASF has maintained the
redirection to the canonical ofbiz.apache.org.

Jacopo

--
Thanks,
   Daniel Dekany

Re: AW: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Could then be easier than expected, commented there too

Le 10/11/2017 à 18:28, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

With that link it works. Note my comment there.

Friday, November 10, 2017, 5:51:50 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


That https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15476 ?

Jacques


Le 10/11/2017 à 16:39, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I have no permission to see it.


Friday, November 10, 2017, 3:26:56 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


I have created
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-15476

For that...

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 21:09, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Thanks! When we have a certificate installed, it will be merged.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 7:23:54 PM, Riehemann, Michael wrote:


I openend 2 pull-requests with the changes for you (since
https://freemarker.apache.org/ works fine for me):

https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/pull/38
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/pull/7


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Daniel Dekany [mailto:ddek...@apache.org]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 15:36
An: Jacques Le Roux 
Betreff: Re: AW: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org
now? Was: Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

As of the links on the web pages, they are generated based on
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/manual/en_US/docgen.cjson
and
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/blob/master/src/main/docgen/docgen.cjson,
so we can update them easily.


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 3:15:56 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Hi Michael,

Yes this was the start of this discussion https://s.apache.org/JFBa :)

freemarker.apache.org is pupettized. I see 2 places where it's
referenced

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/themis.apache.org.eyaml

https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/n
odes/tlp-eu-mid.apache.org.eyaml

AFAIK, we don't need to change anything there or we will see later

But in order to use a letsencrypt certificate we need to change


https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet.git/data/nodes/freemar

ker-vm.apache.org.yaml

I'm looking at it and let you know if I need some help

Thanks

Jacques


Le 09/11/2017 à 11:24, Riehemann, Michael a écrit :

Hi!

I just checked freemarker.org and the redirection to freemarker.apache.org 
works. But I would suggest to change the 301 to HTTPS too!
All links on the website and the documentation are http links instead of https.
It would be nice to redirect everything to https.
If you need any help or some Pull-Request, just give me a hint.

Thank you,
Michael

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 4. November 2017 13:07
An: dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Changing official domain to freemarker.apache.org now? Was: 
Migrating [try.]freemarker.org to HTTPS, anyone?

Le 04/11/2017 à 11:52, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

The freemarker.org domain is now changed to (HTTP 301 redirects to)
freemarker.apache.org, so that this won't stand in the way of
graduation. (The change was submitted to Google Webmasters Tools and
Google Custom Search as well; it may take a while until that will
have
effect.)

Works already here

Jacques

The try.freemarker.org domain is not yet changed. I'm not sure if
that will be a problem during graduation. (I'm somewhat reluctant to
do changes until we know what our domain will be. Like in case we
can't be TLP but a subproject, we can't use freemarker.apache.org, I
guess.)


Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 11:20:36 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Ralph Goers

wrote:


There is no requirement that you ever get rid of the
freemarker.org domain. This is not the first project to have its own domain.


Exactly. For example OFBiz owns the ofbiz.org domain since before
the graduation (2006) and since then the ASF has maintained the
redirection to the canonical ofbiz.apache.org.

Jacopo

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: Home page content changes - please review

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Daniel,

I agree, I'm just unsure a contributor needs an ICLA for medium contributions, 
ie a bit more than fixing typos, like fixing obvious simple bugs.

Anyway that's purely theoretical, since it's something we can bypass for 
specific cases, right?

BTW I did not find for sure the discussion you refer to.

Jacques


Le 11/11/2017 à 20:04, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Months ago we had discussion here about when an ICLA or CCLA is needed for
merging Girhub PR. To reflect that, I have updated this part:
https://freemarker.apache.org/committer-howto.html#merging-pull-request

Do you agree? Especially if you are PPMC, it would be good if you
answer.


Also, the left side menu has changed (like here:
https://freemarker.apache.org/ ), as I have removed the
"Miscellaneous" category, and added the "Foundation" category. The
last is to make certain ASF related matters more accessible. The items
that were under "Miscellaneous":
- sf.net project link was removed (nobody should use that anymore)
- "Source code" was moved to Community (doesn't fit elsewhere...)
- "Project history" was moved under "Foundation"

Re: Home page content changes - please review

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/11/2017 à 11:29, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Sunday, November 12, 2017, 9:49:18 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi Daniel,

I agree, I'm just unsure a contributor needs an ICLA for medium
contributions, ie a bit more than fixing typos, like fixing obvious simple bugs.

When something affects the Java code inside freemarker.jar... I just
can't know what new ideas lawyers will have years later.

If it's an obvious bug fix, without functional change, I think it can be considered a 
"minor contribution", it's not a new idea.
Contrary to, for instance, improvements, enhancements, refactorings which 
should not be considered minor.


Anyway that's purely theoretical, since it's something we can bypass
for specific cases, right?

Yes, but some simple guidelines still should be provided, so there it
is. Especially as these rules can be project-specific.

Yep, I actually already answered positively to this thread.


BTW I did not find for sure the discussion you refer to.

It's here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e7e89eca790799964ba98b6c9d72a6f3320df886ffb07d427648861e@

Thanks

Jacques



Jacques


Le 11/11/2017 à 20:04, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Months ago we had discussion here about when an ICLA or CCLA is needed for
merging Girhub PR. To reflect that, I have updated this part:
https://freemarker.apache.org/committer-howto.html#merging-pull-request

Do you agree? Especially if you are PPMC, it would be good if you
answer.


Also, the left side menu has changed (like here:
https://freemarker.apache.org/ ), as I have removed the
"Miscellaneous" category, and added the "Foundation" category. The
last is to make certain ASF related matters more accessible. The items
that were under "Miscellaneous":
- sf.net project link was removed (nobody should use that anymore)
- "Source code" was moved to Community (doesn't fit elsewhere...)
- "Project history" was moved under "Foundation"

Re: Home page content changes - please review

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks Ralph,

That indeed goes the same way than when we had a check box for that in Jira (I 
can't remember why it was abandoned)

Jacques


Le 13/11/2017 à 00:36, Ralph Goers a écrit :

An ICLA is always encouraged but is not required if the committer knows for 
certain the contributor intends for their contribution to be Apache licensed. 
Simply having a statement in the main README at GitHub with a statement to the 
effect that all contributions submitted as pull requests are under the Apache 
license would be enough.

Ralph


On Nov 11, 2017, at 12:04 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Months ago we had discussion here about when an ICLA or CCLA is needed for
merging Girhub PR. To reflect that, I have updated this part:
https://freemarker.apache.org/committer-howto.html#merging-pull-request

Do you agree? Especially if you are PPMC, it would be good if you
answer.


Also, the left side menu has changed (like here:
https://freemarker.apache.org/ ), as I have removed the
"Miscellaneous" category, and added the "Foundation" category. The
last is to make certain ASF related matters more accessible. The items
that were under "Miscellaneous":
- sf.net project link was removed (nobody should use that anymore)
- "Source code" was moved to Community (doesn't fit elsewhere...)
- "Project history" was moved under "Foundation"

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: Home page content changes - please review

[Jacques Le Roux]

Sounds fair and enough to me

Jacques


Le 13/11/2017 à 09:55, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I have added a such statement to the README.md now:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/

   Regarding pull request on Github

   By sending a pull request you grant the Apache Software Foundation
   sufficient rights to use and release the submitted work under the
   Apache license. You grant the same rights (copyright license, patent
   license, etc.) to the Apache Software Foundation as if you have
   signed a Contributor License Aggreement. For contributions that are
   judged to be non-trivial, you will be asked to actually signing a
   Contributor License Aggreement.

Though it's not shown in a popup with a checkbox before someone makes
a pull request, so anybody can say that they haven't seen it... it's
certainly better than nothing.

Monday, November 13, 2017, 12:36:24 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:


An ICLA is always encouraged but is not required if the committer
knows for certain the contributor intends for their contribution to
be Apache licensed. Simply having a statement in the main README at
GitHub with a statement to the effect that all contributions
submitted as pull requests are under the Apache license would be enough.

Ralph


On Nov 11, 2017, at 12:04 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Months ago we had discussion here about when an ICLA or CCLA is needed for
merging Girhub PR. To reflect that, I have updated this part:
https://freemarker.apache.org/committer-howto.html#merging-pull-request

Do you agree? Especially if you are PPMC, it would be good if you
answer.


Also, the left side menu has changed (like here:
https://freemarker.apache.org/ ), as I have removed the
"Miscellaneous" category, and added the "Foundation" category. The
last is to make certain ASF related matters more accessible. The items
that were under "Miscellaneous":
- sf.net project link was removed (nobody should use that anymore)
- "Source code" was moved to Community (doesn't fit elsewhere...)
- "Project history" was moved under "Foundation"

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Daniel,

Inline...

Le 13/11/2017 à 23:14, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Monday, November 13, 2017, 8:58:51 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


No idea why that thread is not in my inbox.

Anyway I still have the same idea of keeping around the project if my
support can be helpful, technically or whatever.

That's good news, thanks! Of course it can be helpful, like to check
releases sometimes, as we need 3 votes.

As of this thread... I know that we have
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FREEMARKER/Apache+FreeMarker+Project+Maturity+Model,
and according that everything is fine formally, but it isn't. I ran
through some documents on the weekend, and found and fixed a few
smaller problems on the home page.

I had a look at this wiki page and it sounds quite good to me, nothing missing 
or needed to be amended now?


I have also noticed (but not fixed)
that we have no DOAP file
(https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#metadata), and somewhere
I have read that that's needed for graduation (can't find where now).

I can create the DOAP file based on my experience with OFBiz: 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/site/doap_OFBiz.rdf
Where would you suggest to put it? What would be the equivalent of

    Apache OFBiz is an open source enterprise automation 
software project
    
  Apache OFBiz is an open source product for the automation of enterprise 
processes that includes framework components and business applications
  for ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship 
Management), E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management),
  MRP (Manufacturing Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management 
System/Enterprise Asset Management).
  Apache OFBiz provides a foundation and starting point for reliable, 
secure and scalable enterprise solutions.
    
    Java
    http://projects.apache.org/category/http"; />
?
The rest I think I can take care of, or ask more if needed...

Jacques



And that's just what I have noticed, and I haven't read through all
documents yet. So can someone else also run through things?


On Nov 8, 2017 23:17, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:


Thursday, November 9, 2017, 3:05:26 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


Sorry, I can't find that thread...

And I can't link to that, as I have no right to use
https://mail-search.apache.org/pmc/private-arch/freemarker-private/.
But it doesn't mater. The question was that if FreeMarker graduates,
will you stay in the FreeMarker PMC? (One year ago or so you said that
you would, but I wanted that to be reassured.)


On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Daniel Dekany 

wrote:

Wednesday, November 8, 2017, 6:48:07 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


Nothing really that I can see. We should go for discusion seriously

and

voting towards graduation ;-)

There are the things quoted below. Also, please look at the private
list (there was a question if you still intend to remain in the PMC
after graduation).


On Nov 7, 2017 20:02, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:


So, we have released 2.3.27, and has changed the domain of the home
page (not of try.freemarker.org though... is that a problem?).

What's

next? Anyone?


Monday, October 23, 2017, 3:18:54 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


Monday, October 23, 2017, 4:04:54 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


+1 for the migration.
And right after that I think we should start the graduation

process.

Agreed regarding graduation. (We certainly should release 2.3.27
before that, but it's very close anyway, hopefully.)

Related:

-
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FREEMARKER/

Apache+FreeMarker+Project+Maturity+Model

- http://incubator.apache.org/projects/freemarker.html:
   Here some dates are year only.

- https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/freemarker:
   This has some glitches, like it states "No Release Yet/Binary has
   licensing issues"... will have to update this somehow.


Jacopo

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Daniel Dekany <

ddek...@apache.org>

wrote:

As this issue that we aren't using an apache.org domain comes up

again

and again, I propose that we switch to freemarker.apache.org

now.

Also

to try.freemarker.apache.org. Anybody for or against it?


Friday, October 20, 2017, 10:18:01 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:


On Oct 20, 2017, at 5:59 AM, Daniel Dekany <

ddek...@apache.org>

wrote:

Friday, October 20, 2017, 12:24:30 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 01/10/2017 à 23:27, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Sunday, October 1, 2017, 8:26:53 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 23/09/2017 à 08:44, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, September 22, 2017, 11:17:59 PM, Jacques Le Roux

wrote:

Le 22/09/2017 à 22:22, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Google doesn't like plain HTTP sites as we know (SEO),

also I

hear

that starting from October they want to show warning in

Chrome if

you

have forms on your page. We do have forms... On all page

under

http://freemarker.org/docs/ there's

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 17/11/2017 à 13:10, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Note sure what the recommended place is... but as far as I'm
concerned, putting it into the root if the "site" repo
(git://git.apache.org/incubator-freemarker-site.git) is fine.

Done, please check

Jacques

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 18/11/2017 à 00:18, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, November 17, 2017, 11:01:42 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 17/11/2017 à 13:10, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Note sure what the recommended place is... but as far as I'm
concerned, putting it into the root if the "site" repo
(git://git.apache.org/incubator-freemarker-site.git) is fine.

Done, please check

I have committed some fixes.

Some others that came to my mind after that: Others use https links
even for GitRepository/location. Also, we have multiple repositories
(https://freemarker.apache.org/sourcecode.html).
Actually yesterday to be able to push I had to use https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-freemarker.git like it's documented at 
https://freemarker.apache.org/sourcecode.html

git://git.apache.org/incubator-freemarker.git did not work, I was rejected with 
this msg
fatal: remote error: access denied or repository not exported: 
/incubator-freemarker-site.git

So maybe we should rather use that in the doap or even 
https://freemarker.apache.org/sourcecode.html?


asfext:pmc just points to the project home page in the DOAP of some
other projects that I have randomly looked at (from
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/data/projects.xml),
and to http://incubator.apache.org for the incubating ones.

Yep, OFBiz has  a custom page for that
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Apache+OFBiz+PMC+Members+and+Committers
but officially it's at
    https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?ofbiz
So I think we can wait to have the later available (when TLPised)


Whether a PPMC needs a PMC DOAP file... hopefully it's documented
somewhere, someone will have to find it. (I guess not, as the PMC is
the IPMC for now.)

I think it's not needed yet, because only TLPs have PMCs

Jacques

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Sergio, Daniel,

Yes there is no rule for the location of the doap file. Just a reference in 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/data/projects.xml is needed


Jacques


Le 20/11/2017 à 04:42, Sergio Fernández a écrit :

Well, it's my first interaction with the site code base, but I wouldn't mix
the doap data with the docgen sources. But I guess you can do it as you
prefer ;-)

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Ah, I have just seen your commit. You should just move doap.rtf into
src/main/docgen/. No need for new Ant task. It was created on the
wrong place originally...

Sunday, November 19, 2017, 11:46:42 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


Sunday, November 19, 2017, 9:37:45 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Daniel Dekany 

wrote:

I guess it's time to add the reference to
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.
org/data/projects.xml.


Right. I tried to get it published to
https://freemarker.apache.org/doap.rdf
to add that reference, but I didn't manage to locally build the site due
some dependencies' problem. I'll try again later.

You mean a problem with incubator-freemarker-site Ant build? What was
that?

But, you don't need to build the incubator-freemarker-site for this.
Just upload the doap.rdf to the "asf-site" branch of
incubator-freemarker-site directly.


In the meantime I've added the reference to git in
http://svn.apache.org/r1815757, so it should be available at
https://projects.apache.org/project.html?freemarker in the next build

(2 AM

UTC).

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Fwd: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi,

Did not check anything yet, jut spotted that now

Jacques


 Message transféré 
Sujet : Error when processing doap file 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=blob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:
Date :  Mon, 20 Nov 2017 02:00:50 + (UTC)
De :Projects 
Répondre à :site-...@apache.org
Pour :  Site Development 



mismatched tag: line 12, column 2

Re: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Sergio,

What is saying that?

As I said in my e46e2ff066afdd2464469d16b794fc7b16794c0f commit comment, and as suggested by https://projects.apache.org/create.html I then checked 
with https://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/rdfval and it was OK


According to the same it's still OK :)

Jacques


Le 21/11/2017 à 04:48, Sergio Fernández a écrit :

Sorry, my bad.
Fixed in de6050c6d2dfb83de20fca602533e19b26c0eade

Any other details why it failed?

It says "mismatched tag: line 12, column 2", but don't understand why.


On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:28 PM, sebb  wrote:


Please can you fix the DOAP?

Also the following entry is wrong:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-
project.html#freemarker"
/>

It should be

http://incubator.apache.org"; />


Thanks!


-- Forwarded message --
From: Projects 
Date: 21 November 2017 at 02:00
Subject: Error when processing doap file
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-
freemarker-site.git;a=blob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:
To: Site Development 


mismatched tag: line 12, column 2

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Denis,

Sounds good to me, easier to read, the meaning is clear.

Thanks

Jacques


Le 21/11/2017 à 21:48, Denis Bredelet a écrit :

Hi,

I would like to change that sentence in the description:
   You meant to prepare the data to display in a real programming 
language, like issue database queries and do business calculations, and then 
the template displays that already prepared data.

What do you think of:
A general programming language is used to prepare the data, issue database 
queries and do business calculations. Then the Apache FreeMarker template 
engine displays that prepared data using templates.

Cheers,
— Denis.


On 21 Nov 2017, at 19:47, Sergio Fernández  wrote:

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Monday, November 20, 2017, 10:42:11 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


sorry, because I think I've created some confusion on this. Let me try to
explain my self, because there are to aspects on this:

1) From a pure ASF perspective, host the DOAP file from Git is fine. The
system behind projects.a.o will retrieve it and further process it.

2) From a broader Semantic Web perspective, ideally we should have the

DOAP

file publicly available from the project web site.

I aim for 2, that's why I played with the site build. But staying at 1
should be enough. I hope now it's a bit clearer.

I see, but the URL we put into projects.xml is a HTTP URL, so why not
just add a link with that target address on the home page? That's one
less copy of that file that can go out if sync as well. (At that point
it doesn't even make sense anymore that it's inside "site", but
whatever...)


it does for provenance reasons. But you can keep it at git, fine.

Re: Attempting graduation?

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques


Le 22/11/2017 à 09:41, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Yeas, it's less twisted that way, though the meaning slightly differs.
I would refine it further:

Usually, a general-purpose programming language (like Java) is used to
prepare the data (issue database queries, do business calculations).
Then, Apache FreeMarker displays that prepared data using templates.


Tuesday, November 21, 2017, 9:48:24 PM, Denis Bredelet wrote:


Hi,

I would like to change that sentence in the description:
   You meant to prepare the data to display in a real
programming language, like issue database queries and do business
calculations, and then the template displays that already prepared data.

What do you think of:
A general programming language is used to prepare the data, issue
database queries and do business calculations. Then the Apache
FreeMarker template engine displays that prepared data using templates.

Cheers,
— Denis.


On 21 Nov 2017, at 19:47, Sergio Fernández  wrote:

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Monday, November 20, 2017, 10:42:11 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


sorry, because I think I've created some confusion on this. Let me try to
explain my self, because there are to aspects on this:

1) From a pure ASF perspective, host the DOAP file from Git is fine. The
system behind projects.a.o will retrieve it and further process it.

2) From a broader Semantic Web perspective, ideally we should have the

DOAP

file publicly available from the project web site.

I aim for 2, that's why I played with the site build. But staying at 1
should be enough. I hope now it's a bit clearer.

I see, but the URL we put into projects.xml is a HTTP URL, so why not
just add a link with that target address on the home page? That's one
less copy of that file that can go out if sync as well. (At that point
it doesn't even make sense anymore that it's inside "site", but
whatever...)


it does for provenance reasons. But you can keep it at git, fine.

Re: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Not sure what
    http://incubator.apache.org"; />
should contain

When I look into
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/data/projects.xml
for other incubated projects it's not clear to me.

I found none working, is
    https://projects.apache.org/project.html
possible for incubated project?

Jacques

Le 26/11/2017 à 10:17, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

https://projects.apache.org/project.html?freemarker says:

Cannot find the PMC 'freemarker' for this project. Check the DOAP is correct.


Thursday, November 23, 2017, 3:11:32 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


OK, now it should be fully compliant, with the canonical uri for the
podling and incubator as pmc.
So let's if in the next run it will be fine.
Thanks.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, sebb  wrote:


Compare the  wrote:

Why: It does pointing to Incubator, see
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/

blob/master/doap.rdf#L45



On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:57 PM, sebb  wrote:

The DOAP has the wrong pmc reference.
Compare your DOAP against other Incubator project DOAPs.

On 22 November 2017 at 17:30, Sergio Fernández 

wrote:

OK, but https://projects.apache.org/project.html?freemarker doesn't

load

:-/

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:38 AM, sebb  wrote:

Looks like it was a transient error.

AFAICT it worked OK on the last run(s)

On 21 November 2017 at 19:45, Sergio Fernández 
wrote:

The file is valid RDF/XML file, I can warranty that. I think the
infrastructure behind projects.a.o processes those files as XML,

but

I
can't
see what could be the error.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:52 AM, sebb  wrote:

You could try an online validator.

A quick search found be this:

https://www.xmlvalidation.com

I'm sure there are others.


On 21 November 2017 at 03:48, Sergio Fernández 
Sorry, my bad.
Fixed in de6050c6d2dfb83de20fca602533e19b26c0eade

Any other details why it failed?

It says "mismatched tag: line 12, column 2", but don't

understand

why.


On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:28 PM, sebb  wrote:

Please can you fix the DOAP?

Also the following entry is wrong:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-

project.html#freemarker"

/>

It should be

http://incubator.apache.org"; />


Thanks!


-- Forwarded message --
From: Projects 
Date: 21 November 2017 at 02:00
Subject: Error when processing doap file




https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-

freemarker-site.git;a=blob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

To: Site Development 


mismatched tag: line 12, column 2

Re: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 26/11/2017 à 18:36, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

For example https://projects.apache.org/project.html?taverna is
working, and it has exactly the same asfext:pmc as us:

   http://incubator.apache.org"; />

Maybe the project page still uses some older version of our rdf.
(Surely it will be brought up against graduation that we couldn't even
get the damn DOAP file right for weeks... (; )

Mmm, I can remember for sure, but it seems to me I tried Taverna and it did not 
work
Then maybe indeed we just have to wait?

Jacques




Sunday, November 26, 2017, 11:57:28 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Not sure what
      http://incubator.apache.org"; />
should contain

When I look into
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/projects.apache.org/data/projects.xml
for other incubated projects it's not clear to me.

I found none working, is
      https://projects.apache.org/project.html
possible for incubated project?

Jacques

Le 26/11/2017 à 10:17, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

https://projects.apache.org/project.html?freemarker says:

Cannot find the PMC 'freemarker' for this project. Check the DOAP is correct.


Thursday, November 23, 2017, 3:11:32 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


OK, now it should be fully compliant, with the canonical uri for the
podling and incubator as pmc.
So let's if in the next run it will be fine.
Thanks.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, sebb  wrote:


Compare the  wrote:

Why: It does pointing to Incubator, see
https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker-site/

blob/master/doap.rdf#L45


On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:57 PM, sebb  wrote:

The DOAP has the wrong pmc reference.
Compare your DOAP against other Incubator project DOAPs.

On 22 November 2017 at 17:30, Sergio Fernández 

wrote:

OK, but https://projects.apache.org/project.html?freemarker doesn't

load

:-/

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:38 AM, sebb  wrote:

Looks like it was a transient error.

AFAICT it worked OK on the last run(s)

On 21 November 2017 at 19:45, Sergio Fernández 
wrote:

The file is valid RDF/XML file, I can warranty that. I think the
infrastructure behind projects.a.o processes those files as XML,

but

I
can't
see what could be the error.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:52 AM, sebb  wrote:

You could try an online validator.

A quick search found be this:

https://www.xmlvalidation.com

I'm sure there are others.


On 21 November 2017 at 03:48, Sergio Fernández 
Sorry, my bad.
Fixed in de6050c6d2dfb83de20fca602533e19b26c0eade

Any other details why it failed?

It says "mismatched tag: line 12, column 2", but don't

understand

why.


On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:28 PM, sebb  wrote:

Please can you fix the DOAP?

Also the following entry is wrong:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-

project.html#freemarker"

/>

It should be

http://incubator.apache.org"; />


Thanks!


-- Forwarded message --
From: Projects 
Date: 21 November 2017 at 02:00
Subject: Error when processing doap file




https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-

freemarker-site.git;a=blob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

To: Site Development 


mismatched tag: line 12, column 2

Re: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 27/11/2017 à 19:10, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Mmm, I can remember for sure, but it seems to me I tried Taverna and it did not work 

Typo: I can't (of course)

Jacques

Re: Error when processing doap file https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-freemarker-site.git;a=b lob_plain;f=doap.rdf;hb=HEAD:

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 27/11/2017 à 19:10, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Then maybe indeed we just have to wait? 

It seems waiting does not help :(

I tried to compare with https://projects.apache.org/project.html?milagro which 
is smaller http://milagro.incubator.apache.org/doap.rdf
but still don't get what could be wrong.

Maybe we could temporarily simplify the file as much as possible and add 
elements one by one to find the possible culprit/s?

For instance starting by removing all after
https://freemarker.apache.org/freemarkerdownload.html"; />
Also trying to reorder elements, using the same way than in Milagro

If you agree I can try that...

My 2cts so far

Jacques

Re: Alternative to ${exp}

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 28/11/2017 à 10:45, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

This problem comes up again and again: the ${exp} syntax clashes with
the syntax of the thing the user wants to generate. So I believe we
need a Configuration option to address this. Something like
cfg.setInterpolationSyntax(FOO_INTERPOLATION_SYNTAX), and also
<#ftl interpolationSyntax="foo">.

Like any syntax option, this is potentially confusing for users and
problem for tools, but I don't think there's a way around this. Users
have to deal with those clashing ${}-s somehow, and certainly an
in-house hack will be worse and even more confusing. (Surely they can
write ${'$'}{foo} or use #noparse, but if you need a lot of those,
then it's obviously not an acceptable workaround.)

So, what the syntax would be? Some of my ideas:

- {{exp}} is probably the nicest. For the same reason it potentially
   clashes with something yet again, though I guess it's unlikely
   enough that neither ${exp} nor {{exp}} works for you.

- @{exp}. It's similar to ${exp}, which I think is an advantage.
   There's however a very small but still real chance that for someone
   both ${} and @{} clashes with what they want to generate, because
   using {name} is somewhat popular.

- #{exp}. That looks like the natural choice as we use # in tags as
   well (also @, though). The reason I don't like it is that
   we already have #{exp} in the standard syntax, but it's deprecated.
   That's not a problem technically, as you can say that if you select
   the #{} syntax, then it's not deprecated, and ${} will be treated
   as static text. But now if someone sees #{exp}, they can't tell if
   the template uses a deprecated syntax, or it uses the alternative
   interpolation syntax. Also it's perhaps more likely that for someone
   both ${} and #{} clashes (e.g. in the case you generate JSF JSP-s),
   than that that both ${} and @{} clashes.

- <=exp> and [=exp] depending on if you are using square- or
   angle-bracket tag syntax. Look somewhat exotic... which also means
   that hopefully it won't clash with anything.

There's also the idea that we just let the user specify any separator,
like `cfg.setInterpolationStart("@{"); cfg.setInterpolationEnd("}")`.
But if all kind of random syntax is possible, it's harder for users to
figure out what's going on (their syntax isn't mentioned in the
Manual, and nobody on StackOverlfow recognizes it either), and it's
more difficult to support that in tools as well. So I believe it's
better for everyone if there's one, or maybe two standard
alternatives. (Not to mention that I don't yet see how to implement
such a runtime-configured syntax with the current JavaCC-based parser.
Probably it would be a horrid hack if possible at all.)

Opinions, ideas?

Re: Alternative to ${exp}

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 28/11/2017 à 16:43, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :



Le 28/11/2017 à 10:45, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

This problem comes up again and again: the ${exp} syntax clashes with
the syntax of the thing the user wants to generate. So I believe we
need a Configuration option to address this. Something like
cfg.setInterpolationSyntax(FOO_INTERPOLATION_SYNTAX), and also
<#ftl interpolationSyntax="foo">.

Like any syntax option, this is potentially confusing for users and
problem for tools, but I don't think there's a way around this. Users
have to deal with those clashing ${}-s somehow, and certainly an
in-house hack will be worse and even more confusing. (Surely they can
write ${'$'}{foo} or use #noparse, but if you need a lot of those,
then it's obviously not an acceptable workaround.)

So, what the syntax would be? Some of my ideas:

- {{exp}} is probably the nicest. For the same reason it potentially
   clashes with something yet again, though I guess it's unlikely
   enough that neither ${exp} nor {{exp}} works for you.

- @{exp}. It's similar to ${exp}, which I think is an advantage.
   There's however a very small but still real chance that for someone
   both ${} and @{} clashes with what they want to generate, because
   using {name} is somewhat popular.

- #{exp}. That looks like the natural choice as we use # in tags as
   well (also @, though). The reason I don't like it is that
   we already have #{exp} in the standard syntax, but it's deprecated.
   That's not a problem technically, as you can say that if you select
   the #{} syntax, then it's not deprecated, and ${} will be treated
   as static text. But now if someone sees #{exp}, they can't tell if
   the template uses a deprecated syntax, or it uses the alternative
   interpolation syntax. Also it's perhaps more likely that for someone
   both ${} and #{} clashes (e.g. in the case you generate JSF JSP-s),
   than that that both ${} and @{} clashes.

- <=exp> and [=exp] depending on if you are using square- or
   angle-bracket tag syntax. Look somewhat exotic... which also means
   that hopefully it won't clash with anything.

There's also the idea that we just let the user specify any separator,
like `cfg.setInterpolationStart("@{"); cfg.setInterpolationEnd("}")`.
But if all kind of random syntax is possible, it's harder for users to
figure out what's going on (their syntax isn't mentioned in the
Manual, and nobody on StackOverlfow recognizes it either), and it's
more difficult to support that in tools as well. So I believe it's
better for everyone if there's one, or maybe two standard
alternatives. (Not to mention that I don't yet see how to implement
such a runtime-configured syntax with the current JavaCC-based parser.
Probably it would be a horrid hack if possible at all.)

Opinions, ideas?





Oops wrong button => blank message :/

I also prefer {{exp}} for the simple reason that it reminds me Jira and of 
course also for the reasons you explained

Jacques

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

No problem: https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/sub-sub-domain-support/14785

BTW https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-15476 
got an update

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 10:59, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

I don't know if there will be issues with a certificate for sub-sub domain
but I agree with the extra careful approach outlined in your email because
I think it is better to cope with some small headaches now but do our best
to be prepared asap for a successful graduation.

Thanks,

Jacopo

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org,
from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm
worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as
the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use
https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org
cert on a VM).

BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any
gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt
doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way
we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we
will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.)

Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree?

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Ralph,

IIRW openoffice.org is an exception. There are others, when the domain was well 
established before entering the incubator, subversion.org comes to mind.

IMO freemarker.org was well established before entering the incubator but not try.freemarker.apache.org which is quite recent. Hence maybe some 
caution needed...


My 2 cts

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 14:55, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Personally, I don’t see why there should be a problem as long as try.freemarker.org 
 is an Apache controlled domain. You aren’t the only 
project that has a vanity domain. See www.openoffice.org  
as an example.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org,
from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm
worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as
the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use
https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org
cert on a VM).

BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any
gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt
doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way
we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we
will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.)

Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree?

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Mmm, now I'm wondering about that: do we really need a domain for that? Could it not simply be a page of freemarker.apache.org like 
https://freemarker.apache.org/freemarkerdownload.html


Have we not already forms in the main domain?

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 18:38, Ralph Goers a écrit :

The difference is that try.freemarker.org <http://try.freemarker.org/> is a 
companion site. So long as the main site is freemarker.apache.org I don’t think 
anyone will complain about a companion site.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux  
wrote:

Hi Ralph,

IIRW openoffice.org is an exception. There are others, when the domain was well 
established before entering the incubator, subversion.org comes to mind.

IMO freemarker.org was well established before entering the incubator but not 
try.freemarker.apache.org which is quite recent. Hence maybe some caution 
needed...

My 2 cts

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 14:55, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Personally, I don’t see why there should be a problem as long as try.freemarker.org 
<http://try.freemarker.org/> is an Apache controlled domain. You aren’t the only 
project that has a vanity domain. See www.openoffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org/> 
as an example.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org,
from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm
worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as
the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use
https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org
cert on a VM).

BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any
gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt
doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way
we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we
will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.)

Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree?

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 30/11/2017 à 11:22, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Have we not already forms in the main domain?

It's all static HTML. We just use Google Custom Search.


OK I should have asked that in 1st place, I thought we had some (I read it 
somewhere IIRW)

Jacques

Re: Alternative to ${exp}

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 03/12/2017 à 22:06, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

It is also most productive as no shift key is required.

Depends on keyboard, for French keyboard type (azerty) you need to use Alt key 
;)
Same for {{...}} anyway

Jacques

Re: Alternative to ${exp}

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 04/12/2017 à 10:20, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Monday, December 4, 2017, 6:50:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 03/12/2017 à 22:06, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

It is also most productive as no shift key is required.

Depends on keyboard, for French keyboard type (azerty) you need to use Alt key 
;)
Same for {{...}} anyway

Good point. Same on Hungarian keyboard (though I had to check... I
never type source code with hunarian layout). But programming
languages was created with US keyboard in mind, so surely the
developers who are still working using their national keyboard layout
doesn't care much about pressing "Alt Gr". (On Hungarian keyboard even
";" needs "Alt Gr", yet most colegues use Hungarian layout for Java.)
And those who do care will be happier with an English layout friendly
syntax. Though, templates are somewhat different from usual source
code in that they tend to contain more national text, or are edited by
non-programmers, so US layout friendlines has a bit less gain there.

Just for fun, I began to work mostly in APL 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language) and earned my life 
during 20 years with it.
After few years I was so used about it that I could work without the APL 
keyboard layout printed. Actually with APL2 came around few more symbols.
Then I never cared much about key combinations, azerty or not ;)

Jacques

Re: Alternative to ${exp}

[Jacques Le Roux]

I finally agree it sounds like the best

Jacques


Le 15/12/2017 à 11:28, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

OK, so I would go for [=exp] (see the reason told in this thread). How
acceptable is that guys?


Tuesday, December 5, 2017, 11:56:59 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote:


On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Monday, December 4, 2017, 10:21:48 AM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:


uh-huh, but I suspect maybe more collisions or need to escape
character in something like [this] or  than {{this}}. Anyway,
nothing critical IMO, only thinking out loud.

But they were [=this] and <=this>, so the sequences that will clash
are "[=" and "<=", which are quite rare. Oh wait... "<=" is not rare
at all: "if (x <= y)". But "[=" still is. OK, so I guess at this point
the two competitors left are {{exp}} and [=exp] (regardless of tag
syntax).

+1.00 on [=exp].
+0.49 on {{exp}}.

:-D

Many languages or templates allows ${exp}, including JavaScript. [1]
And, mustache is supported in many languages or templates, too. [2]
Therefore, I think there are more chances using both ${exp} and
{{exp}} in output we want to generate in the future.
The mustache style looks charming at the moment, but I wonder how its
charming can help for the original intention (to avoid any possible
collision in the output we want to generate by an alternative as much
as we can).

Regards,

Woonsan

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_interpolation
[2] https://mustache.github.io/


On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Monday, December 4, 2017, 9:17:34 AM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:


So maybe a safe bet (and a familiar one) is the mustache syntax.

In addition to avoiding clashes it might help with a multi-chained
template. For example, we use FreeMarker extensively in Apache OFBiz
to generate many documents including XML. Now our XML documents might
contain some ${variable} that needs to be interpreted in the XML
parser, not the freemarker parser (without having to escape characters
everywhere)

Though that also works with all the other proposal syntaxes as well.


On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Jacques Le Roux
 wrote:

Le 03/12/2017 à 22:06, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

It is also most productive as no shift key is required.

Depends on keyboard, for French keyboard type (azerty) you need to use Alt
key ;)
Same for {{...}} anyway

Jacques


--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany


--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: Please check and sign off our Podling Report for January!

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi David,

Normally you should indeed be an IPMC member 
https://incubator.apache.org/policy/roles_and_responsibilities.html#mentor

As you are an ASF member it's just a question of asking 
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/pmc.html

Maybe you don't want to be an IPMC member?

Jacques


Le 28/12/2017 à 22:56, David E Jones a écrit :

In the issues paragraph it currently says 'is a grooving problem', should
that be 'is a growing problem'?

I'm not sure what to say about my Mentor status without being on the IPMC,
ie don't know if that is a policy change since FreeMarker entered the
incubator, or if has been that way for a longer time, either way this is
the first time for me participating in incubation as a mentor.

Anyway, I'll sign the report just as I have for past reports...

-David


On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Dear PPMC members!

Please read the draft of our report on
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/January2018, and tell if you agree
and what would you change!

Then, when the deadline (Wed, January 03) is close, please also sign
it off, if you agree.

A problem I have noticed that from the original template David E.
Jones was missing. I have added him back, as he's a Mentor as far as I
know, even if not an Incubato comitter. Maybe I shouldn't have for
that reason. David also red on our status page, and is not listed as a
Mentor, at https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/freemarker, saying
"not listed as an incubator committer". But he is listed as a mentor
on http://incubator.apache.org/projects/freemarker.html. I guess this
should be resolved. Like he should be an Incubator committer I guess.

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: Please check and sign off our Podling Report for January!

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques


Le 30/12/2017 à 05:12, Woonsan Ko a écrit :

It looks good to me. Thanks a lot!

Woonsan

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Thursday, December 28, 2017, 10:56:38 PM, David E Jones wrote:


In the issues paragraph it currently says 'is a grooving problem', should
that be 'is a growing problem'?

Thanks, fixed that.


I'm not sure what to say about my Mentor status without being on the IPMC,
ie don't know if that is a policy change since FreeMarker entered the
incubator, or if has been that way for a longer time, either way this is
the first time for me participating in incubation as a mentor.

Anyway, I'll sign the report just as I have for past reports...

-David


On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Dear PPMC members!

Please read the draft of our report on
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/January2018, and tell if you agree
and what would you change!

Then, when the deadline (Wed, January 03) is close, please also sign
it off, if you agree.

A problem I have noticed that from the original template David E.
Jones was missing. I have added him back, as he's a Mentor as far as I
know, even if not an Incubato comitter. Maybe I shouldn't have for
that reason. David also red on our status page, and is not listed as a
Mentor, at https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/freemarker, saying
"not listed as an incubator committer". But he is listed as a mentor
on http://incubator.apache.org/projects/freemarker.html. I guess this
should be resolved. Like he should be an Incubator committer I guess.

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany



--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: Please check and sign off our Podling Report for January!

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Daniel,

It seems only mentors are required to sign off the report: 
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html#podling_status_reports

Jacques


Le 02/01/2018 à 18:04, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

PPMC members who did not yet read and signed off our report, but have
planned to do it, please go ahead (till Wed, January 03)!


Wednesday, December 27, 2017, 10:34:17 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


Dear PPMC members!

Please read the draft of our report on
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/January2018, and tell if you agree
and what would you change!

Then, when the deadline (Wed, January 03) is close, please also sign
it off, if you agree.

A problem I have noticed that from the original template David E.
Jones was missing. I have added him back, as he's a Mentor as far as I
know, even if not an Incubato comitter. Maybe I shouldn't have for
that reason. David also red on our status page, and is not listed as a
Mentor, at https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/freemarker, saying
"not listed as an incubator committer". But he is listed as a mentor
on http://incubator.apache.org/projects/freemarker.html. I guess this
should be resolved. Like he should be an Incubator committer I guess.

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Good, Greg closed INFRA-15476

Jacques

Le 03/01/2018 à 21:23, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I'm "a bit" late with this, but I have created the issue for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/agent/INFRA/issue/INFRA-15775


Friday, December 15, 2017, 1:57:04 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


To summarize, the opininos were (whether we should switch to 
try.freemarker.apache.org):
- Daniel Dekany: We better not risk not doing this
- Jacopo Cappellato: Agrees with me (above) in this
- Jacques Le Roux: No opinion was expressed, but it's technically fine
- Ralph Goers: It's certainly not necessary to do

So, unless someone has more to add, I will ask this from Infra in the
coming days... just to be on the safe side.

Wednesday, November 29, 2017, 6:38:05 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:


The difference is that try.freemarker.org
<http://try.freemarker.org/> is a companion site. So long as the
main site is freemarker.apache.org I don’t think anyone will complain about a 
companion site.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux  
wrote:

Hi Ralph,

IIRW openoffice.org is an exception. There are others, when the domain was well 
established before entering the incubator, subversion.org comes to mind.

IMO freemarker.org was well established before entering the incubator but not 
try.freemarker.apache.org which is quite recent. Hence maybe some caution 
needed...

My 2 cts

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 14:55, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Personally, I don’t see why there should be a problem as long as try.freemarker.org 
<http://try.freemarker.org/> is an Apache controlled domain. You aren’t the only 
project that has a vanity domain. See www.openoffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org/> 
as an example.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org,
from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm
worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as
the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use
https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org
cert on a VM).

BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any
gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt
doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way
we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we
will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.)

Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree?

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: Resolution draft for graduation, members

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques


Le 07/01/2018 à 13:25, Sergio Fernández a écrit :

Draft looks just perfect. I think there us no better candidate for VP than
Daniel.

On Jan 5, 2018 22:08, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:


Here's the Resolution you will vote on (at least that's my plan) in
the graduation VOTE here on the poddling list. Anyone sees any
oversight in it?

As of the list of project members, I have listed everyone who said
that he/she intends to stay so far. Anyone else? In the current list,
everyone intends to be in the PMC as well.

About the "be appointed to the office of Vice President" thing. Who
should be it? I have written there myself for now, as I'm by far the
most involved with the project. But maybe someone else fits that role
better. I don't fancy titles, no offense taken in that case.

And, as always... if you can, please check if we miss any formal
requirements for graduation!



Establish the Apache FreeMarker Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
open-source software, for distribution at no charge to
the public, related to a template engine.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache FreeMarker Project",
be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
Foundation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
related to a template engine, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache FreeMarker" be
and hereby is created, the person holding such office to
serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair
of the Apache FreeMarker Project, and to have primary responsibility
for management of the projects within the scope of
responsibility of the Apache FreeMarker Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and
hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the
Apache FreeMarker Project:

   * Dániel Dékány   
   * David E. Jones      
   * Jacopo Cappellato   
   * Jacques Le Roux 
   * Sergio Fernández
   * Woonsan Ko  

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Dániel Dékány
be appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache FreeMarker,
to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction of the
Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until
death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification,
or until a successor is appointed; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby
is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling; and be it further

RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator
Project are hereafter discharged.

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: try.freemarker.apache.org instead of try.freemarker.org?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks Daniel,

That's a good news. I did not want to get further with try.freemarker.org waiting for this to happen. Once LetsEncrypt setting is done a redirection 
should be enough


Jacques

Le 08/01/2018 à 09:47, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Greg commented on the request:

   try.freemarker.apache.org now works, and is propagated.

   Since that hostname maps to your VM, the certificate to be used for
   try.freemarker.apache.org will need to be hosted/operated by your VM.
   Infra's current policy for project VMs is to use LetsEncrypt for
   certificates. [~pono] will get you set up with that.


Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 11:34:32 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Good, Greg closed INFRA-15476

Jacques

Le 03/01/2018 à 21:23, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I'm "a bit" late with this, but I have created the issue for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/agent/INFRA/issue/INFRA-15775


Friday, December 15, 2017, 1:57:04 PM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


To summarize, the opininos were (whether we should switch to 
try.freemarker.apache.org):
- Daniel Dekany: We better not risk not doing this
- Jacopo Cappellato: Agrees with me (above) in this
- Jacques Le Roux: No opinion was expressed, but it's technically fine
- Ralph Goers: It's certainly not necessary to do

So, unless someone has more to add, I will ask this from Infra in the
coming days... just to be on the safe side.

Wednesday, November 29, 2017, 6:38:05 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:


The difference is that try.freemarker.org
<http://try.freemarker.org/> is a companion site. So long as the
main site is freemarker.apache.org I don’t think anyone will complain about a 
companion site.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux  
wrote:

Hi Ralph,

IIRW openoffice.org is an exception. There are others, when the domain was well 
established before entering the incubator, subversion.org comes to mind.

IMO freemarker.org was well established before entering the incubator but not 
try.freemarker.apache.org which is quite recent. Hence maybe some caution 
needed...

My 2 cts

Jacques


Le 29/11/2017 à 14:55, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Personally, I don’t see why there should be a problem as long as try.freemarker.org 
<http://try.freemarker.org/> is an Apache controlled domain. You aren’t the only 
project that has a vanity domain. See www.openoffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org/> 
as an example.

Ralph


On Nov 29, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org,
from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm
worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as
the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use
https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org
cert on a VM).

BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any
gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt
doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way
we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we
will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.)

Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree?

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany

Re: Resolution draft for graduation, members

[Jacques Le Roux]

Your comments are welcome Taher, and I agree with you

Jacques


Le 08/01/2018 à 10:18, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

I'm not highly involved in this project but I thought I'd make a comment
from my brief experience. Daniel to me seems to be a heavy duty lifter. I
was surprised at how fast he got features and code committed. In addition I
think he has a clear vision for the project and its roadmap. He is open to
ideas and cares about the project and wants to build a community. To me
this makes him a good candidate.

I am not the most active here so I apologize if my comments are out of
place. Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,

Taher Alkhateeb

On Jan 8, 2018 12:06 PM, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:

Monday, January 8, 2018, 6:30:33 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:


You would probably be better served by having someone else
volunteer to be PMC chair. My reasoning for that is exactly for the
same reason you put yourself there. You are the most active
committer and obviously aren’t going anywhere. Having someone else
be chair insures that someone else is staying fairly involved in the
activities of the project, even if they aren’t the most active
committer. You need at least 3 active PMC members so use any
opportunity you can to make sure you stay above that mark.

Since it's a voluntarily position, let's see who wants that
responsibility. Guys, anyone wants to be a PMC chair if the project
graduates?


Ralph


On Jan 7, 2018, at 1:08 PM, David E Jones  wrote:

Looks good Daniel, may it be resolved!

-David

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Here's the Resolution you will vote on (at least that's my plan) in
the graduation VOTE here on the poddling list. Anyone sees any
oversight in it?

As of the list of project members, I have listed everyone who said
that he/she intends to stay so far. Anyone else? In the current list,
everyone intends to be in the PMC as well.

About the "be appointed to the office of Vice President" thing. Who
should be it? I have written there myself for now, as I'm by far the
most involved with the project. But maybe someone else fits that role
better. I don't fancy titles, no offense taken in that case.

And, as always... if you can, please check if we miss any formal
requirements for graduation!



Establish the Apache FreeMarker Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
open-source software, for distribution at no charge to
the public, related to a template engine.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache FreeMarker Project",
be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
Foundation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
related to a template engine, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache FreeMarker" be
and hereby is created, the person holding such office to
serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair
of the Apache FreeMarker Project, and to have primary responsibility
for management of the projects within the scope of
responsibility of the Apache FreeMarker Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and
hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the
Apache FreeMarker Project:

  * Dániel Dékány   
  * David E. Jones  
  * Jacopo Cappellato   
  * Jacques Le Roux 
  * Sergio Fernández
  * Woonsan Ko  

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Dániel Dékány
be appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache FreeMarker,
to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction of the
Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until
death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification,
or until a successor is appointed; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby
is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling; and be it further

RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator
Project are hereafter discharged.

--
Thanks,
Daniel Dekany






--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: Resolution draft for graduation, members

[Jacques Le Roux]

I agree with this description. Another important aspect is to keep focused on the project, not miss anything about it and be ready to answer to the 
board and other outsiders.


That's why I think Daniel is the best person for this role at this moment, when 
the project is just starting.

Because he not only knows the project better than anyone else, but he is also ready to deliver not only code and advices but also administrative tasks 
as he already well proved.


Jacques


Le 08/01/2018 à 16:58, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Please remember that the role of PMC chair doesn’t have much to do with how much you 
commit or perform other project tasks. As you will see at 
https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair 
<https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair> the role is more secretarial than 
anything else. There should be no expectation that the PMC chair is the “leader” of 
the project although they do have responsibilities that other PMC members do not. 
That said, if a PMC chair is indisposed another PMC member should be ready to submit 
the board report in their absence.

You should not be thinking of the PMC chair as being the person who most 
“deserves” it, but the person who has the time to participate in the other 
mailing lists and perform the tasks of the job.

Ralph


On Jan 8, 2018, at 2:18 AM, Taher Alkhateeb  wrote:

I'm not highly involved in this project but I thought I'd make a comment
from my brief experience. Daniel to me seems to be a heavy duty lifter. I
was surprised at how fast he got features and code committed. In addition I
think he has a clear vision for the project and its roadmap. He is open to
ideas and cares about the project and wants to build a community. To me
this makes him a good candidate.

I am not the most active here so I apologize if my comments are out of
place. Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,

Taher Alkhateeb

On Jan 8, 2018 12:06 PM, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:

Monday, January 8, 2018, 6:30:33 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:


You would probably be better served by having someone else
volunteer to be PMC chair. My reasoning for that is exactly for the
same reason you put yourself there. You are the most active
committer and obviously aren’t going anywhere. Having someone else
be chair insures that someone else is staying fairly involved in the
activities of the project, even if they aren’t the most active
committer. You need at least 3 active PMC members so use any
opportunity you can to make sure you stay above that mark.

Since it's a voluntarily position, let's see who wants that
responsibility. Guys, anyone wants to be a PMC chair if the project
graduates?


Ralph


On Jan 7, 2018, at 1:08 PM, David E Jones  wrote:

Looks good Daniel, may it be resolved!

-David

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


Here's the Resolution you will vote on (at least that's my plan) in
the graduation VOTE here on the poddling list. Anyone sees any
oversight in it?

As of the list of project members, I have listed everyone who said
that he/she intends to stay so far. Anyone else? In the current list,
everyone intends to be in the PMC as well.

About the "be appointed to the office of Vice President" thing. Who
should be it? I have written there myself for now, as I'm by far the
most involved with the project. But maybe someone else fits that role
better. I don't fancy titles, no offense taken in that case.

And, as always... if you can, please check if we miss any formal
requirements for graduation!



Establish the Apache FreeMarker Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
open-source software, for distribution at no charge to
the public, related to a template engine.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache FreeMarker Project",
be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
Foundation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
related to a template engine, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache FreeMarker" be
and hereby is created, the person holding such office to
serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair
of the Apache FreeMarker Project, and to have primary responsibility
for management of the projects within the scope of
responsibility of the Apache FreeMarker Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and
hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the
Apache FreeMarker Project:

* Dániel Dékány       
* David E. Jones  
* Jacopo Cappellato   
* Jacques Le Roux 
* Se

Re: Resolution draft for graduation, members

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques


Le 10/01/2018 à 14:39, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

+1

thank you

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


I will add Nan Lei to the members on the Resolution, if you agree.
While he didn't commit since the translation for 2.3.23 was donated,
he might finds time to update it in the future. (He will be a
Committer, not a PMC member, most certainly.)

Other than that, I assume the proposed membership and chair won't
change for now. We can these before the vote in general@i.a.o anyway.


Monday, January 8, 2018, 5:24:02 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


I agree with this description. Another important aspect is to keep
focused on the project, not miss anything about it and be ready to

answer to the

board and other outsiders.

That's why I think Daniel is the best person for this role at this
moment, when the project is just starting.

Because he not only knows the project better than anyone else, but
he is also ready to deliver not only code and advices but also

administrative tasks

as he already well proved.

Jacques


Le 08/01/2018 à 16:58, Ralph Goers a écrit :

Please remember that the role of PMC chair doesn’t have much to do with

how much you commit or perform other project tasks. As you will see at
https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair <https://www.apache.org/dev/
pmc.html#chair> the role is more secretarial than anything else. There
should be no expectation that the PMC chair is the “leader” of the project
although they do have responsibilities that other PMC members do not. That
said, if a PMC chair is indisposed another PMC member should be ready to
submit the board report in their absence.

You should not be thinking of the PMC chair as being the person who

most “deserves” it, but the person who has the time to participate in the
other mailing lists and perform the tasks of the job.

Ralph


On Jan 8, 2018, at 2:18 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <

slidingfilame...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm not highly involved in this project but I thought I'd make a

comment

from my brief experience. Daniel to me seems to be a heavy duty

lifter. I

was surprised at how fast he got features and code committed. In

addition I

think he has a clear vision for the project and its roadmap. He is

open to

ideas and cares about the project and wants to build a community. To me
this makes him a good candidate.

I am not the most active here so I apologize if my comments are out of
place. Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,

Taher Alkhateeb

On Jan 8, 2018 12:06 PM, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:

Monday, January 8, 2018, 6:30:33 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:


You would probably be better served by having someone else
volunteer to be PMC chair. My reasoning for that is exactly for the
same reason you put yourself there. You are the most active
committer and obviously aren’t going anywhere. Having someone else
be chair insures that someone else is staying fairly involved in the
activities of the project, even if they aren’t the most active
committer. You need at least 3 active PMC members so use any
opportunity you can to make sure you stay above that mark.

Since it's a voluntarily position, let's see who wants that
responsibility. Guys, anyone wants to be a PMC chair if the project
graduates?


Ralph


On Jan 7, 2018, at 1:08 PM, David E Jones  wrote:

Looks good Daniel, may it be resolved!

-David

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Dekany 

wrote:

Here's the Resolution you will vote on (at least that's my plan) in
the graduation VOTE here on the poddling list. Anyone sees any
oversight in it?

As of the list of project members, I have listed everyone who said
that he/she intends to stay so far. Anyone else? In the current

list,

everyone intends to be in the PMC as well.

About the "be appointed to the office of Vice President" thing. Who
should be it? I have written there myself for now, as I'm by far the
most involved with the project. But maybe someone else fits that

role

better. I don't fancy titles, no offense taken in that case.

And, as always... if you can, please check if we miss any formal
requirements for graduation!



Establish the Apache FreeMarker Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
open-source software, for distribution at no charge to
the public, related to a template engine.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache FreeMarker Project",
be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
Foundation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
related to a template engine, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache FreeMarker Project from Incubator to TLP

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 (binding)

Jacques


Le 13/01/2018 à 10:31, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Dear FreeMarker Community Members,

Following the discussion on this list
(dev@freemarker.incubator.apache.org) on graduating the Apache
FreeMarker Project from Incubation to a Top Level Project, I start
this voting thread.

Project status information:
- Status page: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/freemarker.html
- Project Maturity Model:
   
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FREEMARKER/Apache+FreeMarker+Project+Maturity+Model

Please vote on the Apache FreeMarker Project resolution that is found
at the bottom of this mail.

[ ] +1 Graduate Apache FreeMarker from the Incubator.
[ ] +0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Don't graduate Apache FreeMarker from the Incubator (please
provide the reason)

The vote is open for a minimum of 72 hours. Please don't hesitate to
indicate if you need more time to check graduation requirements. In
order to succeed, 3 positive votes from PPMC members, and no vetoes
from PPMC member are required.

If this VOTE succeeds, a similar VOTE will be started on the
gene...@incubator.apache.org mailing list. If that succeeds, a
resolution will be included in the next Apache Board Meeting.

Thanks all for your participation
Daniel Dekany

---

Establish the Apache FreeMarker Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
open-source software, for distribution at no charge to
the public, related to a template engine.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache FreeMarker Project",
be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
Foundation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
related to a template engine, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache FreeMarker" be
and hereby is created, the person holding such office to
serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair
of the Apache FreeMarker Project, and to have primary responsibility
for management of the projects within the scope of
responsibility of the Apache FreeMarker Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and
hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the
Apache FreeMarker Project:

   * Dániel Dékány   
   * David E. Jones  
   * Jacopo Cappellato   
   * Jacques Le Roux 
   * Nan Lei 
   * Sergio Fernández
   * Woonsan Ko  

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Dániel Dékány
be appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache FreeMarker,
to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction of the
Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until
death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification,
or until a successor is appointed; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache FreeMarker Project be and hereby
is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling; and be it further

RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache
Incubator FreeMarker podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator
Project are hereafter discharged.

Re: Status file date issues

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 19/01/2018 à 07:54, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Daniel Dekany  wrote:

So, David, can

you join the IPMC? I know, it's annoying and all, but rule are rules.


David, since you are an ASF member you can simply send an email to the
general@incubator list asking to be added to the IPMC.

Jacopo


David,

You can easily remove yourself from IPMC after if you want, you just need to 
send a request email :)

Jacques

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Graduate Apache FreeMarker Project from Incubator to TLP

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Daniel,

For OFBiz I don't understand why

# No Software Grant and No IP Clearance Filed

I guess David, Andrew and the ASF cleared this aspect when we graduated

For the 2 other points

# No Release Yet/Missing ASF Copyright Headers on Source Code
# No Release Yet/Binary has licensing issues

Of course we have released and our RAT report is clean :)

https://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/rat-output.html

BTW is Freemarker providing a RAT report?

Jacques


Le 03/02/2018 à 12:39, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Good! (And sounds like communication is lacking on the other side...)
Now you aren't red on
https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/freemarker#reporting.

There are two other red items though, and I have to admit that I don't
know where does it get that false information from:

  * No Release Yet/Missing ASF Copyright Headers on Source Code
  * No Release Yet/Binary has licensing issues

Do we still miss some project meta info file somewhere? Where are
these Whimsy-related things documented? Are we supposed to care at
all?

I have just checked https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/ofbiz...
well guys, you don't even have Software Grant and IP Clearance. So I
guess this Whimsy thing is still in early stage... or OFBiz needs a
good lawyer. (-;


Friday, February 2, 2018, 11:02:38 PM, David E Jones wrote:


It looks like this is now taken care of (user jonesde now on the IPMC list):

http://home.apache.org/phonebook.html?ctte=incubator

-David


On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:23 PM, Sergio Fernández  wrote:


Please David, engage again with private@incubator.a.o to see what's going
on. I don't recall your issue been discussed, but I may missed it.

On Jan 30, 2018 06:39, "Daniel Dekany"  wrote:


Monday, January 29, 2018, 7:16:21 PM, David E Jones wrote:


On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Daniel Dekany 

wrote:

Monday, January 29, 2018, 4:35:38 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:


Great, Daniel!

Let's move to the next step and open the vote at

general@incubator.a.o

;-)

David has started discussing the issue with his Mentor status on Jan
24. I'm waiting for that to be resolved. Not sure if there's any
progress. David, did they answer? Because then that wasn't CC-ed to
the private list.


I got a reply from John D. Ament on Jan 24th saying he was sending

notice,

but I haven't seen anything since and not sure if I should even expect

any

sort of email notification or if it's something I'd have to hunt around

for

or follow up on.

FWIW I'm not on the Incubator PMC list yet (my ASF username is

'jonesde'):

http://people.apache.org/phonebook.html?pmc=incubator

I also don't know if my failure to respond to John's email in June will
cause any issues, or in general what to expect with all this so I

really

can't say much.

If the process is like here, they have vote (at least 3 days), then
wait for 3 days so the board can veto the decision, and only then mail
you... I hope they have started the process. If they won't report back
in a few days, it would be good if you ask them.


-David

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Graduate Apache FreeMarker Project from Incubator to TLP

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 04/02/2018 à 10:08, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

BTW is Freemarker providing a RAT report?

`ant rat` generates one locally. It contains quite a few false alarms,
but I have only used it for manual checking. It's not published
anywhere.


Hi Daniel,

You can remove false alarms using a rat-excludes.txt placed in the root.

Jacques

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Graduate Apache FreeMarker Project from Incubator to TLP

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 08/02/2018 à 22:30, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Monday, February 5, 2018, 9:38:57 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 04/02/2018 à 10:08, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

BTW is Freemarker providing a RAT report?

`ant rat` generates one locally. It contains quite a few false alarms,
but I have only used it for manual checking. It's not published
anywhere.


Hi Daniel,

You can remove false alarms using a rat-excludes.txt placed in the root.

That's undocumented, or at least I can't find it in the documentation
of Rat. Despite that, I have tried it with the latest stable (0.12,
from 07-Jun-2016... suspicious), but it had no effect. So for now it
will be Ant's good old fileset excludes.

That's also a good solution for now indeed

Jacques

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Graduate Apache FreeMarker Project from Incubator to TLP

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 09/02/2018 à 17:04, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Friday, February 9, 2018, 2:07:54 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 08/02/2018 à 22:30, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Monday, February 5, 2018, 9:38:57 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Le 04/02/2018 à 10:08, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

BTW is Freemarker providing a RAT report?

`ant rat` generates one locally. It contains quite a few false alarms,
but I have only used it for manual checking. It's not published
anywhere.


Hi Daniel,

You can remove false alarms using a rat-excludes.txt placed in the root.

That's undocumented, or at least I can't find it in the documentation
of Rat. Despite that, I have tried it with the latest stable (0.12,
from 07-Jun-2016... suspicious), but it had no effect. So for now it
will be Ant's good old fileset excludes.

That's also a good solution for now indeed

Jacques

I have externalized them to a "rat-excludes" file (purely using Ant
fileset fatures). Now we have no more false alarms. I have also
excluded archives and binaries, so checking if we have new problematic
files will be easy, as everything but Standards and Notes must be 0 in
the report. (I have also updated
https://freemarker.apache.org/committer-howto.html#making-releases
point 6 accordingly.)


Thanks Daniel

Jacques

Re: Proposal for FREEMARKER-84: More flexible handlig of missing templates

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi,

I must say it's much easier for me to understand Jacopo's solution.

But I'm currently not a Freemarker heavy user, so maybe for those users an 
integrated syntax is better.

When I think about it, I had once to use Freemarker heavily for a small CMS creation. And then indeed I think having .get_optional_template would have 
been a plus. Because it's not a workaround, it's more flexible and allows more.


To be frank I was not aware of the special variables and the syntax is not 
easy, but all in all I think it's worth it.

Jacques


Le 16/02/2018 à 08:04, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Some more opinions guys? Especially as we got one opinion against the
feature.


Tuesday, February 13, 2018, 9:59:41 AM, Daniel Dekany wrote:


Tuesday, February 13, 2018, 9:28:18 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:


For less common use cases like this my preference is to defer the
implementation to the template developer rather than adding complexity to
the language.
If I understand the use case that originated this request, something
similar could be achieved with a simple trick like the following:
1) the calling code would be:
<#include "possibly-missing-template.ftl" ignore_missing=true>
<#if !processed??>
 The template was not found or processed!

2) somewhere in possibly-missing-template.ftl (i.e. at the bottom of it) we
add an assign directive like:
<#assign processed=true>

There are some cons to this approach (the most relevant one is that the
referenced template has to contain the #assign directive) but FM users
could live with this approach and in the meantime we could try to get their
feedback to better understand how much this requirement is desired to
justify a change to the codebase.

The need for optional includes is something that was brought up for
several times during the years. It's mostly needed for some custom
fallback logic as far as I can tell. (While there's #include
ignore_missing=true for a while, it doesn't let you to take some extra
action depending on if the template is missing.)

As of it's important enough to add a new feature of this weight (which
low, as it's just yet another special variable, no new directive or
syntax): It's a template language, and in that context
including/importing other templates is probably an important enough
topic to warrant some extras.


Jacopo

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:


See the RFE here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FREEMARKER-84

As you see, the first consensus was introducing `.last_include_found`,
but it has two problems:

* Sometimes it happens that if, and only if the template exists then
   you want to do (usually print) something *before* it. Problem is, by
   the time you know that from `.last_include_found`, it's too late, as
   the template was already processed.

* Like many global state variables in general, this can lead to some
   confusing edge cases and hard-to-follow code. Like, if `#include`
   throws an exception, which is then handled by the user with
   `#attempt`/`#recover`, then `.last_include_found` may or may not be
   updated, as perhaps we haven't yet reached the point where it can be
   told if the template exists. (Consider an expression evaluation
   error in the `#include` parameter, or an I/O error due to which we
   can't access the template directory). Also there are some public
   `include` methods in the `Environment` API, but they can't set this
   variable, as they return a `Template`, and the variable must be set
   after the `Template` was processed, unless the template was missing.
   (If you can't figure out why it must be done that way, that proves
   again how tricky this is... think about includes inside includes.)

So, I propose the solution below. Maybe somewhat difficult to grasp
first, but it meant to be used rarely, and mostly by "experts"...
Let's hope SO and examples in the Manual will help people though. (-;

Introduce a new special variable (see
https://freemarker.apache.org/docs/ref_specvar.html) called
"get_optional_template", which is a TemplateMethodModelEx with these
parameters:

1. template name (maybe a relative path, resolved as #include/#import
does it) 2. A hash that can have the following keys: "parse",
"encoding" (similarly to
https://freemarker.apache.org/docs/ref_directive_include.
html#ref.directive.include).

Example method call (the `.` prefix is the special variable reference
syntax):

   <#assign t = .get_optional_template("foo.ftl", { 'encoding': 'utf-8' })>

The method returns a hash (`t` above) that contains the following keys:

- "include": directive (or missing); `<@t.include />` has similar
   effect as `<#include "foo.ftl">`

- "import": method (or missing); returns a namespace. `<#assign f =
   t.import()>` has similar effect as `<#import 'foo.ftl' as f>`

- "exists": boolean; returns if the template was found.

The method call loads the target template eagerly, i.e., it won't wait
until `t.include`, `t.exist` etc. is actually used.

Note t

Re: Moving JBoss FreeMarker IDE (Eclipse plugin) to the ASF?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 09/03/2018 à 10:32, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

So I think "FreeMarker IDE" should be brought over to the ASF,
similarly as FreeMarker-Online was. Also the Eclipse update "site"
should be hosted on ASF infrastructure. I have started a discussion to
explore this possibility, and so far it seems it's fine on their side:

http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/2018-March/subject.html

The code is under EPL,

Wrong, sorry... It's under LGPL 2.1 (and the copyright holder is
RedHat "and individual contributors"), at least on most source files.

I have suggested at JBoss Tools that if they sign CCLA and then make a
PR to a repo at ASF that we create for this product, that way
contributing the whole source code to the ASF, then we can replace the
license headers etc. I have indicated that this is just my personal
understanding. So, will that work? We did the same with "FreeMarker
Online".


Hi Daniel,

I believe it depends on RedHat "and individual contributors" good wills.
Maybe easier for RedHat than "individual contributors" depending how RedHat 
handles that part.
Contrary to ASL2, for LGPL 2.1 I don't know, we might need help from legal if 
RedHat can't tell.

Jacques

Re: Moving JBoss FreeMarker IDE (Eclipse plugin) to the ASF?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 09/03/2018 à 13:56, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

  Surely that
possibility is a major feature of these OS licenses... but of course
we can't do that here at the ASF (or, I presume so).

I think the contrary, the ASL2 is permissive not the LGPL 2.1 which is copyleft. That's 
my concern for the others "individual contributors".
How to be sure they agree about giving their rights to the ASF? It's OK for us if RedHat does the job, else we need to do it near the others 
"individual contributors"


Jacques

Re: Moving JBoss FreeMarker IDE (Eclipse plugin) to the ASF?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 09/03/2018 à 16:59, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I was hasty here... as some people use multiple e-mail addresses, it's
actually "only" 19 contributors, out of which 11 is/was at RedHat.

So it's only 8 persons to reach since RedHat seems OK. That sounds doable :)

Jacques

Re: Moving JBoss FreeMarker IDE (Eclipse plugin) to the ASF?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 13/03/2018 à 16:47, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

Tuesday, March 13, 2018, 2:44:14 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote:


On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Daniel Dekany  wrote:

Sunday, March 11, 2018, 5:22:39 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:


If RedHat took ownership of the tool then they should be able to
take care of changing the license and sending an SGA to the ASF.

In the case of FreeMarker Online *we* have changed the headers after
the PR from Kenshoo (the contributor) was merged. But in the case of
FreeMarker IDE it's much less obvious (to me at least) if they own the
thing fully ("Red Hat Middleware, LLC, and individual contributors"),
so better push that step on them? Is that what you mean?

I'm not a lawyer, but whether Red Hat owns fully or partially, if they
don't agree, I don't think we can simply move it to ASF.

They had no objection. But they can't tell if they are willing to do
the transfer until we tell them what exactly that involves. The less
work it is for them, the more likely it is that they will be nice and
do the thing, instead of just saying "well, fork it, the license
allows that" (which is correct, only then it can't be done at the ASF,
or so I assume so at least).

Right, can't be committed on an official ASF repo, or rather it can't be 
released (which is barely the same eventually)




However, nothing in your email indicates that RedHat has any
interest in donating the tool to the ASF.

Nick Boldt was positive about the idea, and he has CC-ed to some
others as well (some are legal guys I presume), and also it was on
jbosstools-dev (a public list), and so far there was no negative
reactions, except that they don't want much work with this. So, if
this is to progress anywhere, I believe first we have to tell them
what exactly they had to do, and then they can make up their minds.
Actually, they are waiting for me to tell if ASF wants this at all,
and how.

Do you mean the 'individual contributors' by them?

I mean the guys working at RedHat / JBoss Tools.
Then it should be easier than I thought, they are still all employees of RedHat? I guess not but the number of people having left RedHat must be less 
than 8 and so it could be easier than expected





I'm afraid that ASF cannot give a good direction to them as the
'owner's should decide what to do themselves first. We can just say
we're willing to host the project if the 'owner's willing to do
donate though.

It's our turn. I'm really just waiting to hear if the other PPMC
members think that this should be attempted (like, if we want that
code at all), then I will ask ASF Legal.

IMO it's worth it if we can get an agreement with RedHat about their employees 
and if some have left maybe we will need to contact them ourselves.

Jacques



Regards,

Woonsan


Short of that your only real option is to fork it to GitHub. You
would have to leave the existing code as LGPL but anything new you
add could use any license you want.

That will happen if it can't come here.


Another option would be to look at the functionality of the tool and
create something similar without using any of the code. Of course,
that is a lot more work.

Yeah, but I'm afraid that's unlikely to happen... Or, anyone wants to
write nice fresh and modern Eclipse plugin, certainly based on the
Eclipse LSP and TextMate syntax highlight plugins? If someone says
that he will reach a release within a few months, then users can just
survive on my personal fork until that...


Ralph


On Mar 9, 2018, at 11:03 AM, Jacques Le Roux  
wrote:

Le 09/03/2018 à 16:59, Daniel Dekany a écrit :

I was hasty here... as some people use multiple e-mail addresses, it's
actually "only" 19 contributors, out of which 11 is/was at RedHat.

So it's only 8 persons to reach since RedHat seems OK. That sounds doable :)

Jacques

--
Thanks,
  Daniel Dekany