Daniel E. Renfer wrote:
Brian Cully <[email protected]> writes:On 24-Apr-2009, at 00:39, Nickola Kolev wrote: Gonna have to disagree with both points here. I like the config syntax, since it's just erlang. I can put emacs into erlang mode and get all my normal tools for dealing with syntax errors. You'll have a much harder time with some custom format if you make a syntax error. Also, debugging and fixing ejabberd is about as simple as it can get, assuming you know erlang already. You can attach to running nodes and interactively debug and do hot code loads for fixes. You cannot do that with any of the other implementations that I know of and it comes in extremely handy sometimes. I'm not ejabberd's biggest fan (as some of you from the ejabberd list probably already know), but its features and hackability put it in a class by itself. -bjcThis was the reason I chose OpenFire when I was trying to make my choice of servers. I didn't know Erlang, but I did know Java. I figured if something *did* break, or I wanted to change something, I would be better off with the language I knew, versus one, at the time, I had never heard of.
Choice of language doesn't matter much to me, since hackability has more to do with the design of the code than the choice of language.
We chose ejabberd over openfire for the following distinguishing features: - support for clustering - support for multiple domains - support for custom authentication (external auth script) Jesse -- Jesse Thompson Division of Information Technology, University of Wisconsin-Madison Email/IM: [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
