On 12/10/2010, at 12:37 PM, Adam Heath wrote: > On 10/11/2010 06:26 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >> On 12/10/2010, at 11:45 AM, Adam Heath wrote: >> >>> On 10/11/2010 04:25 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >>>> On 12/10/2010, at 10:03 AM, Adam Heath wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/11/2010 02:37 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> Impressive, now I know what Webslinger is and what it is capable of! >>>>> >>>>> Actually, this is just one application. Webslinger(-core) is an enabling >>>>> technology, that enables anything to be written quickly. As I said, I've >>>>> only spent probably 2 actual weeks on the application itself. >>>> >>>> The main question in my mind is what does all this mean for OFBiz? >>>> Obviously because webslinger is currently in the framework you envisage it >>>> playing some sort of role in the ERP applications, but what exactly? >>> >>> It means that webslinger could run all of cwiki.apache.org, being fully >>> java dynamic. The front page is currently giving me 250req/s with single >>> concurrency, and 750req/s with a concurrency of 5. And, ofbiz would be >>> running along side, so that we could do other things as well. >> >> That wasn't what I was asking but since you mention it, what does > > that actually mean for us? Part of reason we moved to the ASF was > > so that we could rely on their infrastructure instead of maintaining > > our own. Assuming we replaced confluence with webslinger then what > > do we do if you disappear from the scene in a year's time? The idea > > of learning a new obscure tool doesn't sound very appealing. > > Who said that this was going to stay a brainfood-only project?
No one and I didn't make that assumption. > We have every intention of making webslinger(-core) a public, community > project. There isn't anything really like this. I'm sure every dead open source project had the intention of building a thriving community but it doesn't always work out that way. What I am asking is what will the OFBiz documentation gain by being hosted on webslinger(-core?) that makes it worth the risk of the project being abandoned and us having to move it all back to confluence or whatever the ASF is using by then? And what is (-core)? Does that imply that there is a webslinger(-pro) edition that OFBiz users can take advantage of by contracting with or licensing from brainfood? I don't think a little skepticism is out of order when you tell us how wonderful it would be for OFBiz to include webslinger if your company stands to benefit from its inclusion. I'm not even saying that's a bad thing, I just prefer to have the full picture. > * Nested servlet container(minor point). > * Filesystem overlay(think unionfs). > * Many servlet-like configuration points can be configured dynamically at > runtime thru the filesystem. > > Again, since all this stuff is in the filesystem, git/svn work on all > aspects. Merging between previous, development, workstation, and production > is quite simple to do. > > Because of the overlay capability, it's also easy to upgrade a base code > module, with a light-weight file layout, and have the content site > transparently sit on top, with a unified view of everything. > >>>> I think I understand better now why Ean and yourself were somewhat >>>> negative towards the possibility of a jackrabbit integration, do >>>> you see this as some sort of alternative? >>> >>> Storing content in the database is wrong. How do you use normal >>> editors(vim/emacs/dreamweaver/eclipse/photoshop) to manipulate files? How >>> do you run find/grep? What revision control do you use(git/svn/whatever)? >>> The webslinger mantra is to reuse existing toolsets as much as possible. >>> That means using the filesystem, which then gives you nfs/samba access for >>> sharing, etc. >>> >>> The filesystem api we use is commons-vfs; we don't actually use commons-vfs >>> itself, most of the implementation and filesystems have been rewritten to >>> actually be non-blocking and performant and not have thread leaks or memory >>> leaks or dead-locks. We don't use bsf(too much reflection, too much >>> synchronization). >> >> Alternative, got it. >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
