Link Details

Freemarker should always be preferred over Velocity. Just look at their source codes.

Velocity is like log4j, old school. It should be deprecated, but its not. I didnt know that Freemarker has that much better preformance. I think that autor didnt say strong enought that when you use Velocity you need to manually test is it works ok(for every possible combination).

its just like
try {
// code
} catch (Exception e){
}

compared to

try {
// code
} catch (Exception e){
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}

I prefer FreeMarker because of its error handling. For me, the usefulness of a template engine drastically lowers if I need to spend time puzzling over what's going on.

ps. i just found funny that author suggest that Velocity is the best
"Jeroen van Bergen started working in information technology in 1993. He has worked in the fields of billing, systems integration, and order management in the telecommunication industry. He has been programming in Java since 2000. Jeroen is at the moment mainly interested in workflow, Java-XML binding, and automatic document generation using Velocity and XSL:FO."

he knows all of them and hes using Velocity :D lazy guy, but Freemarker is not that hard to learn(Its almost the same). But some people when they get used to some technology cant leave it behind.

I've been using Velocity for quite a while. I haven't seen any reason to use FreeMarker.

the author should have mentioned some about documentation like velocity doesn't have any that matters.

er,

http://velocity.apache.org/engine/releases/velocity-1.5/user-guide.html

There is a response to the article on the FreeMarker group blog. http://freemarker.blogspot.com/2007/12/velocity-of-freemarker-looking-at-5.html
,There is a response to the article on the FreeMarker group blog. http://freemarker.blogspot.com/2007/12/velocity-of-freemarker-looking-at-5.html