On 10/11/2010 06:58 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 12/10/2010, at 12:37 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
On 10/11/2010 06:26 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 12/10/2010, at 11:45 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
On 10/11/2010 04:25 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 12/10/2010, at 10:03 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
On 10/11/2010 02:37 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Impressive, now I know what Webslinger is and what it is capable of!
Actually, this is just one application. Webslinger(-core) is an enabling
technology, that enables anything to be written quickly. As I said, I've only
spent probably 2 actual weeks on the application itself.
The main question in my mind is what does all this mean for OFBiz? Obviously
because webslinger is currently in the framework you envisage it playing some
sort of role in the ERP applications, but what exactly?
It means that webslinger could run all of cwiki.apache.org, being fully java
dynamic. The front page is currently giving me 250req/s with single
concurrency, and 750req/s with a concurrency of 5. And, ofbiz would be running
along side, so that we could do other things as well.
That wasn't what I was asking but since you mention it, what does
that actually mean for us? Part of reason we moved to the ASF was
so that we could rely on their infrastructure instead of maintaining
our own. Assuming we replaced confluence with webslinger then what
do we do if you disappear from the scene in a year's time? The idea
of learning a new obscure tool doesn't sound very appealing.
Who said that this was going to stay a brainfood-only project?
No one and I didn't make that assumption.
We have every intention of making webslinger(-core) a public, community
project. There isn't anything really like this.
I'm sure every dead open source project had the intention of building a
thriving community but it doesn't always work out that way. What I am asking
is what will the OFBiz documentation gain by being hosted on webslinger(-core?)
that makes it worth the risk of the project being abandoned and us having to
move it all back to confluence or whatever the ASF is using by then?
And what is (-core)? Does that imply that there is a
webslinger(-pro) edition that OFBiz users can take advantage of
by contracting with or licensing from brainfood? I don't think
a little skepticism is out of order when you tell us how wonderful
it would be for OFBiz to include webslinger if your company stands
to benefit from its inclusion. I'm not even saying that's a bad
thing, I just prefer to have the full picture.
Yeah, I'm not surprised you picked up on that. It's a very good question.
webslinger-core is the enabler. It has no application logic. It just
makes it simple(r) to write applications. It would be like taking the
entityengine, serviceengine, all the widget systems, and the
controller, but with *no* config files, no entitymodel, no service
definitions, etc. webslinger-core is the system-level classes, and
nothing else.
Webslinger, however, is the combination of the core, and all the
runtime classes/css/html templates. This would be similiar to the
actions, ftl, and widget definitions, but only in framework.
Finally, a webslinger application would then be everything that exists
in an ofbiz applications/foo or specialpurpose/foo folder.
There will never be a difference in webslinger-core, between an
internal/external system. It would take more time to try and keep
those things separate.
