Re: [Webmacro-devel] Bug in repeating invocations of #eval, and future directions of webmacro

[Tim P. <ti...@pa...>]

Hi Alex,

Great  to hear from you, not so great that you have found a bug !

[snip]

> So I'm going to patch EvalDirective to sort this out which brings me onto my
> second point.
> I've been doing a bit of playing around with webmacro myself and I've got a
> clone of the git repository that Guy Bolton-King took of the sourceforge CVS
> repository and this is sitting at https://github.com/alex-fiennes/webmacro

I do not understand why you are using a copy of someone else's copy of
webmacro? You are a committer, so should be using the trunk.

> This has been a gentle experiment so far because I haven't found anything
> that is actually broken yet, but come this bug then I suspect that I might
> well start using my branch for production stuff rather than just playing
> around with ideas.
> Who else other than me is still using webmacro and should I just continue to
> work on my github branch and move forwards?  Failing that, do people want me
> to backport changes across to sourceforge?

> Stuff that I have been initially working on in github is:
>
> removing the dependencies on the EDU.oswego.cs.dl.util.concurrent packages

This is done:

http://webmacro.sourceforge.net/dependencies.html

> and using the java concurrent packages
> adding in generics declarations as required so that the package will compile
> cleanly against modern java.
>
> What I am planning to work on is:
>
> adding in support for invoking varargs methods from inside templates
> a certain amount of refactoring to use more of google guava libraries as
> appropriate
> better error reporting on nested templet invocations

I do not know about this, but would aim towards zero external dependencies.

> If people want to let me know whether or not any of this is of interest to
> anyone then we can work out how to move forwards.  If I don't hear back from
> anyone then I will assume that everyone has moved on to new pastures and I
> will just continue down the path outlined above.

I would like to understand why you and Guy have forked WM.

Is it just because WM is not using Git?

If so please, lets put the effort into getting the cvs to git
transfer done.

It seems that by using Guy's copy you have missed out on the work
I have done and are proposing to redo it.

It is great to see someone taking an interest, but I would really like
it if this was going on within the project not outside.
Git is great and I think WM should move to it, but to be using a copy
before the trunk has been transferred seems a recipe for wasted work.

cheers
Tim


-- 
Tim Pizey
http://pizey.net/~timp