Re: Play nice! Re: Savant/Flexy/Foo template engines

On Jun 9, 2004, at 6:07 PM, Joshua Eichorn wrote:

I would just like to point out that no matter how hard you argue Savant isn't that Different from a compling template, and they can easily be integrated in a good design.

It depends on your definition of "that Different". I provided some objective reasons in my previous emails and you did provided yours, fair enough. But in my opinion a non caching and not compiling template system is not the same thing or a duplicate of the existing template engines.

Savant - Wrapper to control php only template Compling Template - Compiler to php on template -> wrapper to control php on template I know some people don't see this but the last step is the same.

The issue is, what would be the end user benefit? I don't see any benefit on downloading Flexy + Savant vs downloading just Savant or just Flexy. It will just mean that PEAR isn't just committed to quality code, but to provide valuable alternatives to the same problem and respect different approaches. If your desire for a unique template engine is linked to the fear that users will be confused, well I do believe that every developer should do a bit of research before downloading and using a PEAR package.

It should be quite possible to design things so that the last step is shared, saying they are really different isn't an argument i buy.

I understand your point and I try to see things from your angle. Yet I haven't heard a real reason to justify that a common uber-template (which in case you wonder will not happen that easily) would provide a substantial benefit to 2 packages with their own differences. Thanks for sharing your views, Regards David Costa

-josh -- PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php