At the end of the day, if Velocity has reached EOL then we will at some stage have to consider a new way forward. If FM is being actively developed and provides a good migration path then it is a likely candidate for consideration.
Nobody seemed to express any concerns when WM, FM and Jython support was removed, but at that point in time Velocity was still being actively developed (and as Jeffrey points out Turbines support for all of the others was not). If I was new to Turbine today I think I would be questioning the logic of using Velocity for my templates, but then again if there was no support for anything else then I wouldn't really have a choice would I :-) If FM was supported and there was at least a sample of app that used it then I would probably consider it. The biggest push to use something other than Velocity would be if the Turbine site said something like "Velocity is really great, but no longer being maintained, we recommend you use ??? instead".
As a general direction I think it would be great if we at least look at relaxing the coupling between turbine and velocity such that it would be easier to hook some other template service in should someone have the desire and cycles to put it together.
Cheers,
Scott
-- Scott Eade Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd. http://www.backstagetech.com.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
