On 01/22/2013 08:01 AM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
On 01/08, Hugh Brock wrote:
Maybe a crazy idea, but Torquebox already includes messaging, background
jobs, services and all other things mentioned in the original email.
I have PoC of running Conductor inside Torquebox (using jRuby). I
understand it might be a big step but definitely worth to at least
investigate as an option :-)
Just my .20cents.
-- Michal
We've talked about using torquebox on-and-off over the last couple
years. The growing consensus there seems to be that we do want to be
able to run on it, but not at the expense of getting locked in to using
_only_ torquebox. In other words, the main issue with going to Torquebox
would be to make sure that we _don't_ start requiring the use of
services that only exist in torquebox -- so to use the above services
we'd have to make each one of them either pluggable (so we could also
use pure ruby alternatives) or optional.
Scott
