| Lists: | spi-general |
|---|
| From: | Ean Schuessler <ean(at)brainfood(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joerg Jaspert <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Meeting agenda robot |
| Date: | 2008-12-24 18:02:03 |
| Message-ID: | 14844723.20811230141723314.JavaMail.root@zimbra.xen.brainfood.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Lists: | spi-general |
----- "Joerg Jaspert" <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:
> Perl, Python or Ruby should all be ok. No Java please.
Other than your personal bias, what do you base that on? Java is, by far, the highest performance platform of those you have listed. That doesn't consider the fact that Python, Ruby, Javascript, PHP and many others can be compiled to Java bytecode. That is a feat that none of those other platforms can match. For that matter, JRuby outruns Ruby... even Ruby 1.9.
Can you provide some technical motivation for why you wouldn't want to use the fastest, most scalable and most flexible web framework available for Linux?
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean(at)brainfood(dot)com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315
| From: | Bruce Perens <bruce(at)perens(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ean Schuessler <ean(at)brainfood(dot)com> |
| Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk>, Joerg Jaspert <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Meeting agenda robot |
| Date: | 2008-12-24 18:23:04 |
| Message-ID: | 49527E08.9010008@perens.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Lists: | spi-general |
Ean Schuessler wrote:
> JRuby outruns Ruby... even Ruby 1.9.
While the last "ruby shootout" benchmark set is about a year old, it
hardly showed JRuby as a performer. At that time I think it would have
been fair to characterize JRuby as running at about 1/10 the speed of
Yarv, the implementation that became Ruby 1.9 .
http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/12/03/the-great-ruby-shootout/
The main reason I'd not tremendously recommend building new projects in
Java is efficient utilization of the programmer, and of the subsequent
programmers who will have to maintain the project. Performance will not
be the critical factor for this project.
For best readability by subsequent maintainers, either Python or Ruby
should be recommended. The disciplined can write elegant software in any
language, but some languages are better at guiding the programmer to do
so than others.
Thanks
Bruce
| From: | Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ean Schuessler <ean(at)brainfood(dot)com> |
| Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk>, Joerg Jaspert <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Meeting agenda robot |
| Date: | 2008-12-24 18:38:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20081224183838.GZ9852@kaplowitz.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Lists: | spi-general |
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:02:03PM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Can you provide some technical motivation for why you wouldn't want to use
> the fastest, most scalable and most flexible web framework available for
> Linux?
This is not really an answer to your question for a variety of reasons, not the
least of which is I'm not Joerg, but do all these scalable and flexible Java
frameworks work with OpenJDK, preferably as packaged in Debian? I certainly
wouldn't want SPI stuff running on something that wasn't free software such as
the binary Sun JRE/JDK, and I'd probably veto that as far as software relating
to secretarial duties, such as we're discussing here.
Assuming the solution we end up with works entirely with free software
(counting OpenJDK as free software), I don't have strong preferences as far as
what we use, but I'm quite happy to defer to the preferences of Joerg in this
regard since he's the one who will have to do the sysadmin work and I don't
want his job to be unpleasant. I'd still be interested in knowing his reasons,
both technical and non-technical, but I'm not going to dispute them.
- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org
| From: | Ean Schuessler <ean(at)brainfood(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> |
| Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk>, Joerg Jaspert <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Meeting agenda robot |
| Date: | 2008-12-24 20:12:38 |
| Message-ID: | 11783417.20901230149558199.JavaMail.root@zimbra.xen.brainfood.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Lists: | spi-general |
----- "Jimmy Kaplowitz" <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:
> This is not really an answer to your question for a variety of reasons, not the
> least of which is I'm not Joerg, but do all these scalable and flexible Java
> frameworks work with OpenJDK, preferably as packaged in Debian? I certainly
> wouldn't want SPI stuff running on something that wasn't free software such as
> the binary Sun JRE/JDK, and I'd probably veto that as far as software relating
> to secretarial duties, such as we're discussing here.
>
> Assuming the solution we end up with works entirely with free software
> (counting OpenJDK as free software), I don't have strong preferences as far as
> what we use, but I'm quite happy to defer to the preferences of Joerg in this
> regard since he's the one who will have to do the sysadmin work and I don't
> want his job to be unpleasant. I'd still be interested in knowing his reasons,
> both technical and non-technical, but I'm not going to dispute them.
OpenJDK is pretty much equivalent to JRE on the server. I don't do a lot of Swing programming these days so I'm not sure if the font hinting problems have been cleared up. I'm pretty sure they are.
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean(at)brainfood(dot)com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315