I helped provide the improvements below to Cayenne's velocity-based
template generator. I'm willing to be a resource on this if someone
wants to work on it, but I don't have the time or desire to do it
myself -- I migrated most of my EOGenerator templates to
Cayenne/Velocity years ago, and for the one remaining WO project I'm
still working on, it's easier for me to load my EOModel into Cayenne
and use the Cayenne modeler/template generator than to go back to
EOGenerator.
On 3/12/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> WOGen has been available for the last 5 (?) years and *is* an
> EOGenerator replacement. And in fact is uses Velocity templates
> (which is also my preference over WO tags in this case).
>
> http://wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WOGen
>
> IIRC there were some complaints about this or that feature missing
> from it, but well, it can be added. And if there are volunteers to
> upgrade it to Cayenne 2.0 backend, it can take advantage of the much
> improved template extension mechanism in the new Cayenne.
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2007, at 5:02 PM, Brusowankin, David S [CCC-OT_IT] wrote:
>
> > How about Jakarta Velocity?
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: John Huss [mailto:johnthus..mail.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 11:00 AM
> >> To: woproject-de..bjectstyle.org
> >> Subject: EOGenerator Replacement
> >>
> >> There was a discussion a while back about replacing EOGenerator
> >> because it's dependence on some old libraries. How about using
> >> WebObjects as the template engine instead of MiscMerge? WO can make
> >> any kind of textual content, so why not make it a code generator?
> >>
> >> I see these advantages:
> >>
> >> 1) Removes dependence on old libraries and puts the new dependence on
> >> WO itself, which is safe since if WO went away this tool would be
> >> useless anyway
> >>
> >> 2) It would be cross-platform, since it's pure Java. Currently you
> >> can't run EOGenerator on Windows without the dlls shipping with WO
> >> 5.2. This is one of the main reasons WO development on Windows (with
> >> WO 5.3) is not feasible.
> >>
> >> 3) Templates using WO syntax would be easier for WO developers to
> >> edit
> >> and maintain than the MiscMerge ones
> >>
> >> 4) It would be quick to write (I bet) since there are many
> >> experienced
> >> WO developers here
> >>
> >> What are your thoughts?
> >>
> >> John Huss
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Mar 12 2007 - 12:13:42 EDT