Re: Embperl vs. Mason (fwd)

[Stas Bekman <sb...@iname.com>]

[it's a third time repost. My messages don't get thru?]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Joshua Chamas wrote:

> Stas Bekman wrote:
> > I understand that the review that Joshua has posted seems to be the
> > correct one. Am I right?
> > 
> 
> I'm all for putting up my rough review of Mason vs. Embperl up, but will 
> Gerald & Jonathan do similar reviews of ASP vs. Mason, & Embperl vs. ASP.
> I'm kind of interested in the generic feel of those gentlemen reversed.
> 
> Would some sort of grid be useful listing, comparing, even
> ranking features for each environment ?  Is there anyone impartial
> who could do this ?  Again it might be interesting to have the 
> authors do it for each other.

Sounds good. 

I think it'd immensly help to learn the exact reasons why this or that
technology (module) was started. Explaining what functionality was missing
in the existing modules, what was inconvenient, incorrectly implemented,
etc. This should give user an idea of which module fits her needs the
best.

Of course the modules has been changed since then, so an update from the
authors explaining how their babe has been changed, would complete the
picture. 

I think about having the three sections of each review to make it perfect. 

The first section to be presented by the author of the module. History,
current and future development.

The second -- by the authors of the competing/similar modules. What didn't
you like about the module (technology) in question, which made you start a
new one. 

The third -- by unbiased users. Experience, learning curve, scalability,
etc. 

What do you think?

BTW, mod_perl itself perfectly fits into this model, and need to be
compared to FastCGI, Velocigen and other similar solution.

Merging this set of reviews with Joshua's benchmarks will make a great
service to the users.

_______________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman    mailto:sbekman@iname.com      http://www.stason.org/stas
Perl,CGI,Apache,Linux,Web,Java,PC     http://www.stason.org/stas/TULARC
perl.apache.org    modperl.sourcegarden.org   perlmonth.com    perl.org
single o-> + single o-+ = singlesheaven    http://www.singlesheaven.com

Returned mail: User unknown

[Mail Delivery Subsystem <MA...@concept-micro.com>]

The original message was received at Wed Feb 16 14:15:31 MET 2000
from  modperl@apache.org
 
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
petchema@deckard
 
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to deckard.:
>>> RCPT To:<pe...@deckard>
<<< 550 Bad recipient
550 petchema@deckard... User unknown
Reporting-MTA: dns; deckard
 
Arrival-Date: Wed Feb 16 14:15:31 MET 2000
Final-Recipient: RFC822; petchema@deckard
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 Bad recipient
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed Feb 16 14:15:31 MET 2000

Returned mail: User unknown

[Mail Delivery Subsystem <MA...@concept-micro.com>]

The original message was received at Wed Feb 16 12:23:01 MET 2000
from  modperl@apache.org
 
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
petchema@deckard
 
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to deckard.:
>>> RCPT To:<pe...@deckard>
<<< 550 Bad recipient
550 petchema@deckard... User unknown
Reporting-MTA: dns; deckard
 
Arrival-Date: Wed Feb 16 12:23:01 MET 2000
Final-Recipient: RFC822; petchema@deckard
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 Bad recipient
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed Feb 16 12:23:01 MET 2000