[Catalyst-dev] Re: RFC: Catalyst::View::Email and Catalyst::View::TemplateEmail

[Jason Kohles]

On Mar 26, 2007, at 11:17 AM, J. Shirley wrote:

> On 3/23/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis at gmx.de> wrote:
>> * Jonathan Rockway <jon at jrock.us> [2007-03-23 06:30]:
>> > What's wrong with just C::V::Email?  Are people realistically
>> > going to use anything else?
>>
>> That's fine if the module is template engine agnostic. If not
>> (but it should be), then the template engine should be included
>> in the name (à la C::V::Email::TT).
>>
>
> I agree with Aristotle, and I think C::V::Email::(TT|Mason) works
> better.  If no engine is specified, it will simply look at stash keys
> for the content.  I can't imagine why someone would have a Catalyst
> app without some templating engine in place, but... there are stranger
> things out there.
>

I have a Catalyst app without a templating engine.  It doesn't serve  
any dynamic HTML pages at all, only a couple of static pages, some  
other assorted static files (.css, .png, .js, etc...) and a huge  
amount of dynamic JSON data.

-- 
Jason Kohles
email at jasonkohles.com
http://www.jasonkohles.com/
"A witty saying proves nothing."  -- Voltaire