[Seaside] [ANN] Seaside 2.8 for VW

[Conrad Taylor]

Hi Michel, I didn't ask the question in regards to Gemstone/S VM or the
underlying server because I don't have access to that environment.  The only
HTTP server environments that I have access to in regards to are the
following:
Swazoo 1.0 (Squeak/VW)
WebToolkit (VW)
Komache (Squeak)

-Conrad

On 9/3/07, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2007/9/3, Bany, Michel <mbany at cincom.com>:
> >
> >
> > Hi Conrad,
> >
> > Hi Michel, I have a couple of questions in regards to Seaside on VW:
> >
> >
> > 1)  How does one port a Seaside application to Gemstone/S VM in terms of
> > namespaces?  I would
> >      like to use GLASS as my deployment platform but use VW as the
> > development platform.
> > I'm certainly not the best person to answer your question, since I have
> no
> > experience with Gemstone.
> >
> > 2)  When upgrading to SeasideForWebToolkit(2.8a1.466.0,mbany), does the
> > system load the other
> >      packages (i.e. SeasideScriptaculous(2.8a1.216.0,mbany)
> >      and SeasideTestingBundle(R1.5.5.0,mbany)?
> > No
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 3)  Does the SeasideForSwazoo(2.8a1.466.0 ,mbany) use Swazoo 2.0?
> >
> > It is intended to work with Swazoo as shipped on the VW distribution,
> i.e.
> > Swazoo 1.0.
> > I just tried it myself with Swazoo 2.0 and could see that
> SeasideForSwazoo
> > does not work on top of Swazoo 2.0.
> > While trying it, I could see that supporting Swazoo 2.0 is nothing
> trivial,
> > so it will take its little time before it is supported.
>
> I have a very basic server adpater for Swazoo 2 running. I'll post it
> later today.
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
> >
> > 4)  Is there any advantage to using SeasideForSwazoo(2.8a1.466.0,mbany)
> over
> >
> >      SeasideForWebToolkit(2.8a1.466.0,mbany) in regards to performance?
> > So far my target for Seaside was WebToolkit, because it is the Cincom
> > supported web environment in VW.
> > I created the Swazoo bindings just to convince myself that there is no
> > WebToolkit dependency in the port.
> > However, I never compared the performance of the two. I guess they must
> be
> > somehow more or less kind of equal.
> > On the other hand, it appears that Swazoo is the server of choice for
> some
> > Seaside users, so there must be some advantage in Swazoo but I do not
> > remember what the motivations were.
> >
> > I see some contradictions in your questions : you care about the
> performance
> > of two VW solutions while your deployment target is Gemstone. I would
> better
> > understand if you were querying about the performance advantage of using
> > Gemstone over VW.
> >
> > HTH
> > Michel.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Seaside mailing list
> > Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/attachments/20070903/9243d98f/attachment.htm