Hi > On 09 Jan 2014, at 20:58, David Golden <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Shlomi Fish <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Also, I consider D2 to still be alpha quality. >> >> Can you please elaborate on which problems/bugs/etc. you ran into with >> Dancer2 >> that make you say that? > > It's not stable. The API and internal architecture is still a work in > progress. E.g. look at the 0.11 changes to redirect and forward. > These *are* improvements (fixing the regressions that broke saving > sessions in a hook), but the overall rate of change is still high > enough that I deem Dancer2 "alpha" quality.
For what is worth, I share David's view. I have 5 apps using D2 in production, one of them for a workflow that is now responsible for a couple of M€ worth of revenue at work (it was an unexpected success :) ), and we hard-code to D2 8 + patches to make sure everything works. 9 was a bust, 10 had some issues with extensions we use, haven't tried 11 yet. If I cannot make upgrade of D2 between minor version safely, then it should be considered alpha. Mind you I still think D2 is our best solution (Kelp and Web::Machine being closed by depending on the needs of the project) and all new projects start with D2, but still on our patched D2 8. Bye, _______________________________________________ dancer-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users
