Zed A. Shaw
zedshaw at zedshaw.com
Mon Feb 5 13:58:05 EST 2007
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 08:39:15 -0700
"Kirk Haines" <wyhaines at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/5/07, Kirk Haines <wyhaines at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 2/4/07, Zed A. Shaw <zedshaw at zedshaw.com> wrote:
> > > Not if I implement my master plan to allow multiple Ruby applications to live in one Mongrel. :-)
> > That doesn't seem to be a Mongrel level issue, though, is it?
> Replying to myself. :)
> This is probably a better discussion for the Mongrel list, but I
> suppose if one did something like incorporate _why's sandboxing, one
> could run multiple discrete apps at the same time without the
> framework having to support this. Seems like that would work, too.
> What are you thinking?
Yeah, I'll be bringing this and other stuff up on the Mongrel list, but my comment was more that framework developers tend to assume they are THE ONE TRUE FRAMEWORK and don't play well with others. It's be nice if they assumed otherwise and then it'd be easier for Mongrel to at least run multiple instances of the same framework but different apps in small installations.
As for Sandbox, it'd be great but currently afaik it's horribly slow.
Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu
http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book
http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 -- Come get help.
More information about the Nitro-general