Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Loic d'Anterroches
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 07:35
On 2012-01-31 07:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
> This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
> respond to this?
Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn from
the reasons. It does not mean that we are going to agree, but it creates
debate, interrogations and help test the assumption one made when
creating the software in the first place. This is good.
> To be blunt, it seems monserver so entirely misses the point of
> mongrel2's design choices as to be totally irrelevant. Does it matter
> if someone pointlessly forks the project?
You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
Forking is learning.
> I don't ask these questions to be a prick, I'm genuinely curious how
> people view the issues of IP, community, branding, etc.
Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
tests and experimentations of others. This is how we went from hanging
in trees to sending stuff beyond the heliosphere. For IP it is open
source, for the branding, it is written black on white in the LICENSE
file in point 3.
Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
loïc
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Tang Daogang <daogangtang@gmail.com
> <mailto:daogangtang@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:28 PM, James Dennis <jdennis@gmail.com
> <mailto:jdennis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> This feels like a minor alteration compared to what I would
> expect to see if you're using an entirely different name for a
> project.
>
> Do you have other plans for differentiation?
>
>
> No any plans yet now.
>
> But maybe use lua's capacity to improve mongrel2's stability, or add
> some new feature if needed. Any how, monserver will keep the step
> following mongrel2 for a very long time.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Tang Daogang
> <daogangtang@gmail.com <mailto:daogangtang@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> The point is:
>
> 1. lua is an excellent configuration choice;
> 2. SQL is also a kind of language;
> 3. I want to keeping monserver in NoSQL family, avoid any
> SQL related stuff;
> 4. use lua configuration, you can combine 'm2sh load' and
> 'm2sh start' to one procedure, reduce the error probability.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ben Beecher
> <benbeecher@gmail.com <mailto:benbeecher@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Both m2sh and the sqlite database can be scripted with
> lua. What's the
> point forcing those choices rather than staying language
> independent?
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Tang Daogang
> <daogangtang@gmail.com <mailto:daogangtang@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> > hi, every one.
> >
> > I start a project named 'monserver' based on
> 'mongrel2'. Project address
> > is https://github.com/daogangtang/monserver
> >
> > monserver is different with mongre2 in the following
> sides:
> >
> > 1. remove the sqlite part in mongrel2, use lua style
> file to configure it;
> > 2. will use lua script to replace m2sh.
> >
> > Because the philosophies of them are different, I
> start a new project rather
> > than create a new branch on mongrel2.
> >
> > Anybody some suggestions?
> >
> > thx.
> >
> > --
> > Nothing is impossible.
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Nothing is impossible.
>
>
>
>
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Nathan Duran
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 08:55
On Jan 30, 2012, at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches wrote:
> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
I looked at it and I looked at all of Mr. Daogang's instability and
"corruption" related accusations over the past year or so which have all
either evaporated into thin air or been proven to be a complete and total
lack of understanding on his part. Given what I've looked at, I'm going to
have to say I'm in the same camp as David on this one. The manual
advocates writing your own config generator so writing your own config
generator does not really warrant any proclamations of dramatic philosophy
shifts.
Not my list and not my rules, but I would not personally agree that
calling such posts "noise" qualifies as trolling. I do happen to find
trolls wildly entertaining, though, so it wouldn't be unfair to say I'm
unfit to judge that sort of thing.
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- David Kantowitz
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 10:22
I was not aware of Mr. Daogang's history on the mailing list, but obviously
I'm not surprised.
Putting that aside, I actually found Loic's answers very useful. I'm not
an OSS developer. I work on commercial projects and while we have all
sorts of communication problems, they tend to be a bit different then the
ones in an OSS project. So getting a different perspective was useful for
me.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Nathan Duran <principal@khiltd.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 30, 2012, at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches wrote:
>
> > You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
>
> I looked at it and I looked at all of Mr. Daogang's instability and
> "corruption" related accusations over the past year or so which have all
> either evaporated into thin air or been proven to be a complete and total
> lack of understanding on his part. Given what I've looked at, I'm going to
> have to say I'm in the same camp as David on this one. The manual advocates
> writing your own config generator so writing your own config generator does
> not really warrant any proclamations of dramatic philosophy shifts.
>
> Not my list and not my rules, but I would not personally agree that
> calling such posts "noise" qualifies as trolling. I do happen to find
> trolls wildly entertaining, though, so it wouldn't be unfair to say I'm
> unfit to judge that sort of thing.
>
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- David Kantowitz
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 08:18
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches <loic@ceondo.com>wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-01-31 07:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
> > This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
> > respond to this?
>
> Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn from
> the reasons.
In very broad terms that's true. However shouldn't you make an attempt to
sort out educated vs un-informed opinions and desires? (ie. you don't
normally ask -- or care -- about your pediatrician's view on tire rotation
patterns).
Or do you just treat it all equally since who knows what triggers an
inspiration?
Or does the very fact that such misunderstanding exists indicate an area of
potential improvement in Mongrel2?
Or ...
> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
>
Perhaps _you_ don't consider it pointless, but I'm certainly willing to
based on the author's described intent and reasons. Nothing wrong with
that, we all filter information in different ways to decide what is of
interest or value.
> Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
> tests and experimentations of others.
So you just wait and see what someone does. Maybe a better configuration
syntax will be developed, etc. Putting words in your mouth ... you think
it's better to encourage people who are at least interested enough to make
an effort (no matter how misguided the effort might be) , it's all part of
the process of improvement when you have a diverse volunteer community.
> Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
> point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
> discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
> rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
>
I'm definitely biased and I admit I'm generally not open to discussion
about ideas that, to me, seem unreasonably stupid. Obviously other people
on this list (people whom I generally observe to be serious people worth
reading) are willing to discuss it, so I wonder what I'm missing that other
people are seeing.
Regards,
David K.
PS. Thanks for replying. You clearly have a much more egalitarian view of
these things then I do. Gives me a different perspective.
PPS. No lingering troll waiting to launch. If the meat of a troll-like
email was that the mongrel2 community is "too responsive" to users, I'd
certainly hope everyone would have the good sense to ignore that email.
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Sebastian Otaegui
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 15:02
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man." -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
(1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"
My two cents
On Jan 31, 2012 2:19 AM, "David Kantowitz" <dkantowitz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches <loic@ceondo.com>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2012-01-31 07:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
>> > This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
>> > respond to this?
>>
>> Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn from
>> the reasons.
>
>
> In very broad terms that's true. However shouldn't you make an attempt
to sort out educated vs un-informed opinions and desires? (ie. you don't
normally ask -- or care -- about your pediatrician's view on tire rotation
patterns).
>
> Or do you just treat it all equally since who knows what triggers an
inspiration?
> Or does the very fact that such misunderstanding exists indicate an area
of potential improvement in Mongrel2?
> Or ...
>
>
>>
>> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
>
> Perhaps _you_ don't consider it pointless, but I'm certainly willing to
based on the author's described intent and reasons. Nothing wrong with
that, we all filter information in different ways to decide what is of
interest or value.
>
>>
>> Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
>> tests and experimentations of others.
>
>
> So you just wait and see what someone does. Maybe a better configuration
syntax will be developed, etc. Putting words in your mouth ... you think
it's better to encourage people who are at least interested enough to make
an effort (no matter how misguided the effort might be) , it's all part of
the process of improvement when you have a diverse volunteer community.
>
>
>>
>> Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
>> point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
>> discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
>> rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
>
>
> I'm definitely biased and I admit I'm generally not open to discussion
about ideas that, to me, seem unreasonably stupid. Obviously other people
on this list (people whom I generally observe to be serious people worth
reading) are willing to discuss it, so I wonder what I'm missing that other
people are seeing.
>
> Regards,
> David K.
>
> PS. Thanks for replying. You clearly have a much more egalitarian view
of these things then I do. Gives me a different perspective.
>
> PPS. No lingering troll waiting to launch. If the meat of a troll-like
email was that the mongrel2 community is "too responsive" to users, I'd
certainly hope everyone would have the good sense to ignore that email.
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Hedge Hog
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 20:16
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Sebastian Otaegui <feniix@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
> depends on the unreasonable man." -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
> (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"
>
> My two cents
I like to dream that Linus embraced the of idea forking precisely to
avoid having anyone quote Shaw... probably not :)
The monserver project should be left free to go its own way, hopefully
it won't misrepresent the innovation of its contribution. In the
worst case, where it does misrepresent, that tells you lots about the
project that you wouldn't otherwise know, and the false claims can be
refuted - it would not be a perfect result, but one much better than
quarantining mongrel2 behind some gatekeepers
In case anyone is tempted to give this 'Shaw' approach to software
development/progress credence, i.e. embrace the unreasonable ideas,
can I argue that we leave out such facile syllogisms as the basis on
which to decide how to proceed?
Read more of Shaw to discover the true horror of the man's insights.
But if you are persuaded by Shaw:
Unreasonable people murder, therefore progress depends on you...
Astonishing that you can find Shaw quoted in literate circles!
4c :)
>
> On Jan 31, 2012 2:19 AM, "David Kantowitz" <dkantowitz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches <loic@ceondo.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2012-01-31 07:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
>>> > This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
>>> > respond to this?
>>>
>>> Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn from
>>> the reasons.
>>
>>
>> In very broad terms that's true. However shouldn't you make an attempt to
>> sort out educated vs un-informed opinions and desires? (ie. you don't
>> normally ask -- or care -- about your pediatrician's view on tire rotation
>> patterns).
>>
>> Or do you just treat it all equally since who knows what triggers an
>> inspiration?
>> Or does the very fact that such misunderstanding exists indicate an area
>> of potential improvement in Mongrel2?
>> Or ...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
>>
>> Perhaps _you_ don't consider it pointless, but I'm certainly willing to
>> based on the author's described intent and reasons. Nothing wrong with
>> that, we all filter information in different ways to decide what is of
>> interest or value.
>>
>>>
>>> Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
>>> tests and experimentations of others.
>>
>>
>> So you just wait and see what someone does. Maybe a better configuration
>> syntax will be developed, etc. Putting words in your mouth ... you think
>> it's better to encourage people who are at least interested enough to make
>> an effort (no matter how misguided the effort might be) , it's all part of
>> the process of improvement when you have a diverse volunteer community.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
>>> point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
>>> discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
>>> rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
>>
>>
>> I'm definitely biased and I admit I'm generally not open to discussion
>> about ideas that, to me, seem unreasonably stupid. Obviously other people
>> on this list (people whom I generally observe to be serious people worth
>> reading) are willing to discuss it, so I wonder what I'm missing that other
>> people are seeing.
>>
>> Regards,
>> David K.
>>
>> PS. Thanks for replying. You clearly have a much more egalitarian view of
>> these things then I do. Gives me a different perspective.
>>
>> PPS. No lingering troll waiting to launch. If the meat of a troll-like
>> email was that the mongrel2 community is "too responsive" to users, I'd
>> certainly hope everyone would have the good sense to ignore that email.
--
πόλλ' οἶδ ἀλώπηξ, ἀλλ' ἐχῖνος ἓν μέγα
[The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.]
Archilochus, Greek poet (c. 680 BC – c. 645 BC)
http://hedgehogshiatus.com
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- David Kantowitz
- Date:
- 2012-02-01 @ 00:58
It is a strange quote ... kind of mutant offspring of "the ends justify the
means" and "be bold; believe in yourself".
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Hedge Hog <hedgehogshiatus@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Sebastian Otaegui <feniix@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> > persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
> > depends on the unreasonable man." -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
> > (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"
> >
> > My two cents
>
> I like to dream that Linus embraced the of idea forking precisely to
> avoid having anyone quote Shaw... probably not :)
>
> The monserver project should be left free to go its own way, hopefully
> it won't misrepresent the innovation of its contribution. In the
> worst case, where it does misrepresent, that tells you lots about the
> project that you wouldn't otherwise know, and the false claims can be
> refuted - it would not be a perfect result, but one much better than
> quarantining mongrel2 behind some gatekeepers
>
> In case anyone is tempted to give this 'Shaw' approach to software
> development/progress credence, i.e. embrace the unreasonable ideas,
> can I argue that we leave out such facile syllogisms as the basis on
> which to decide how to proceed?
>
> Read more of Shaw to discover the true horror of the man's insights.
> But if you are persuaded by Shaw:
> Unreasonable people murder, therefore progress depends on you...
>
> Astonishing that you can find Shaw quoted in literate circles!
>
> 4c :)
>
>
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2012 2:19 AM, "David Kantowitz" <dkantowitz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches <loic@ceondo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2012-01-31 07:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
> >>> > This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
> >>> > respond to this?
> >>>
> >>> Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn
> from
> >>> the reasons.
> >>
> >>
> >> In very broad terms that's true. However shouldn't you make an attempt
> to
> >> sort out educated vs un-informed opinions and desires? (ie. you don't
> >> normally ask -- or care -- about your pediatrician's view on tire
> rotation
> >> patterns).
> >>
> >> Or do you just treat it all equally since who knows what triggers an
> >> inspiration?
> >> Or does the very fact that such misunderstanding exists indicate an area
> >> of potential improvement in Mongrel2?
> >> Or ...
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
> >>
> >> Perhaps _you_ don't consider it pointless, but I'm certainly willing to
> >> based on the author's described intent and reasons. Nothing wrong with
> >> that, we all filter information in different ways to decide what is of
> >> interest or value.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
> >>> tests and experimentations of others.
> >>
> >>
> >> So you just wait and see what someone does. Maybe a better
> configuration
> >> syntax will be developed, etc. Putting words in your mouth ... you
> think
> >> it's better to encourage people who are at least interested enough to
> make
> >> an effort (no matter how misguided the effort might be) , it's all part
> of
> >> the process of improvement when you have a diverse volunteer community.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
> >>> point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
> >>> discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
> >>> rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm definitely biased and I admit I'm generally not open to discussion
> >> about ideas that, to me, seem unreasonably stupid. Obviously other
> people
> >> on this list (people whom I generally observe to be serious people
> worth
> >> reading) are willing to discuss it, so I wonder what I'm missing that
> other
> >> people are seeing.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> David K.
> >>
> >> PS. Thanks for replying. You clearly have a much more egalitarian view
> of
> >> these things then I do. Gives me a different perspective.
> >>
> >> PPS. No lingering troll waiting to launch. If the meat of a troll-like
> >> email was that the mongrel2 community is "too responsive" to users, I'd
> >> certainly hope everyone would have the good sense to ignore that email.
>
>
>
> --
> πόλλ' οἶδ ἀλώπηξ, ἀλλ' ἐχῖνος ἓν μέγα
> [The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.]
> Archilochus, Greek poet (c. 680 BC – c. 645 BC)
> http://hedgehogshiatus.com
>
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Loic d'Anterroches
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 08:46
Hello,
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Loic d'Anterroches <loic@ceondo.com
> <mailto:loic@ceondo.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2012-01-31 07 <tel:2012-01-31%2007>:38, David Kantowitz wrote:
> > This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
> > respond to this?
>
> Because if someone wants to do something differently, one can learn from
> the reasons.
>
>
> In very broad terms that's true. However shouldn't you make an attempt
> to sort out educated vs un-informed opinions and desires? (ie. you don't
> normally ask -- or care -- about your pediatrician's view on tire
> rotation patterns).
I happen to have written OSS software used by a couple of people around
the world since something like 1998. I also happen to be French, living
in Germany after a while in Denmark and some time around the world from
Japan to the US. What I learnt is that email is the worst medium to get
your point through, especially with OSS, because we are all coming from
different backgrounds, different language (both computer and speaking).
The end result is that a lot of emails are often not expressing
correctly the view of the authors and as such keeping the communication
open just a bit can clear out a lot of confusions. Just ignoring is
really unpolite. You do not like to ping a server and get nothing back
because the icmp packet was filtered even if it is true what the German
say: "Keine Antwort ist auch eine Antwort." But German are very direct.
As you can read, my answer is more about the human side of the story
than the technological. I personally think that one need to cultivate
both nicely to have a successfull project at the end. If you read in the
archives, you will find that I need to improve with this point :D
loïc
>
> Or do you just treat it all equally since who knows what triggers an
> inspiration?
> Or does the very fact that such misunderstanding exists indicate an area
> of potential improvement in Mongrel2?
> Or ...
>
>
>
> You cannot consider a fork as pointless before even looking at it.
>
> Perhaps _you_ don't consider it pointless, but I'm certainly willing to
> based on the author's described intent and reasons. Nothing wrong with
> that, we all filter information in different ways to decide what is of
> interest or value.
>
>
> Go fork, discuss, exchange, try to be open, we can *all* learn from the
> tests and experimentations of others.
>
>
> So you just wait and see what someone does. Maybe a better
> configuration syntax will be developed, etc. Putting words in your
> mouth ... you think it's better to encourage people who are at least
> interested enough to make an effort (no matter how misguided the effort
> might be) , it's all part of the process of improvement when you have a
> diverse volunteer community.
>
>
>
> Note that the words you used "why anyone bothers", "entirely misses the
> point", "pointlessly forks" give a tone which is not really open to the
> discussion. I am left wondering if your questions are real or just
> rhetorical like someone launching a troll.
>
>
> I'm definitely biased and I admit I'm generally not open to discussion
> about ideas that, to me, seem unreasonably stupid. Obviously other
> people on this list (people whom I generally observe to be serious
> people worth reading) are willing to discuss it, so I wonder what I'm
> missing that other people are seeing.
>
> Regards,
> David K.
>
> PS. Thanks for replying. You clearly have a much more egalitarian view
> of these things then I do. Gives me a different perspective.
>
> PPS. No lingering troll waiting to launch. If the meat of a troll-like
> email was that the mongrel2 community is "too responsive" to users, I'd
> certainly hope everyone would have the good sense to ignore that email.
--
Dr Loïc d'Anterroches
Founder Céondo Ltd
w: www.ceondo.com | e: loic@ceondo.com
t: +44 (0)207 183 0016 | f: +44 (0)207 183 0124
Céondo Ltd
Dalton House
60 Windsor Avenue
London
SW19 2RR / United Kingdom
Re: [mongrel2] [ANN] monserver 0.1 start
- From:
- Tang Daogang
- Date:
- 2012-01-31 @ 07:10
But in fact, the new style config file is very similar to the old python
style one, such as:
static_ajaxpaginator_test = { type="dir", base='sites/ajaxpaginator_test/',
index_file='index.html', default_ctype='text/plain' }
handler_ajaxpaginator_test = { type="handler", send_spec='tcp://
127.0.0.1:10001',
send_ident='ba06f707-8647-46b9-b7f7-e641d6419909',
recv_spec='tcp://127.0.0.1:10002', recv_ident=''}
main = {
bind_addr = "127.0.0.1",
uuid="505417b8-1de4-454f-98b6-07eb9225cca1",
access_log="logs/access.log",
error_log="logs/error.log",
chroot="./",
pid_file="run/mongrel2.pid",
default_host="ajaxpaginator_test",
name="main",
port=6767,
hosts= {
{
name="ajaxpaginator_test",
matching = "xxxxxx",
routes={
['/'] = handler_ajaxpaginator_test,
['/media/'] = static_ajaxpaginator_test
}
},
}
}
settings = {
['zeromq.threads'] = 1,
['limits.content_length'] = 20971520,
['upload.temp_store'] = '/tmp/mongrel2.upload.XXXXXX'
}
mimetypes = {}
servers = { main }
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:38 PM, David Kantowitz <dkantowitz@gmail.com>wrote:
> This is completely off-topic, but I do wonder why anyone bothers to
> respond to this?
>
> To be blunt, it seems monserver so entirely misses the point of mongrel2's
> design choices as to be totally irrelevant. Does it matter if someone
> pointlessly forks the project?
>
> I don't ask these questions to be a prick, I'm genuinely curious how
> people view the issues of IP, community, branding, etc.
>
> Thanks,
> David K.
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Tang Daogang <daogangtang@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:28 PM, James Dennis <jdennis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This feels like a minor alteration compared to what I would expect to
>>> see if you're using an entirely different name for a project.
>>>
>>> Do you have other plans for differentiation?
>>>
>>
>> No any plans yet now.
>>
>> But maybe use lua's capacity to improve mongrel2's stability, or add some
>> new feature if needed. Any how, monserver will keep the step following
>> mongrel2 for a very long time.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Tang Daogang <daogangtang@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> The point is:
>>>>
>>>> 1. lua is an excellent configuration choice;
>>>> 2. SQL is also a kind of language;
>>>> 3. I want to keeping monserver in NoSQL family, avoid any SQL related
>>>> stuff;
>>>> 4. use lua configuration, you can combine 'm2sh load' and 'm2sh start'
>>>> to one procedure, reduce the error probability.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ben Beecher <benbeecher@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Both m2sh and the sqlite database can be scripted with lua. What's the
>>>>> point forcing those choices rather than staying language independent?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Tang Daogang <daogangtang@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > hi, every one.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I start a project named 'monserver' based on 'mongrel2'. Project
>>>>> address
>>>>> > is https://github.com/daogangtang/monserver
>>>>> >
>>>>> > monserver is different with mongre2 in the following sides:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 1. remove the sqlite part in mongrel2, use lua style file to
>>>>> configure it;
>>>>> > 2. will use lua script to replace m2sh.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Because the philosophies of them are different, I start a new
>>>>> project rather
>>>>> > than create a new branch on mongrel2.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Anybody some suggestions?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > thx.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Nothing is impossible.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nothing is impossible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nothing is impossible.
>>
>>
>
--
Nothing is impossible.