Yaws API discussion

Johan Blom <>
Wed Jul 17 10:27:06 CEST 2002


Hi,

On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 20:03, Mickael Remond wrote:
> Chris Pressey <>:
> 
> > Even more unpopular opinion follows:
> > 
> > I don't see the big deal with yaws besides performance
> 
> Because I think that there is a need in a application server that is simple to
> use and code with and performant and I feel that it can be achieved by an Erlang
> development. All solutions that I know of are complicated and clumsy.
> 
> For the rest, I tend to think that Open Source is about improving the tool that
> fit best your need at a given moment of time.
> What worries me is energy dispersion. Here is the list of Erlang HTTP server
> that I know of:
> - Inets 2
> - Inets 3
> - Pico
> - Yaws
> - possibly your incoming HTTP Server, Chris
Just to clarify a bit on the different inets versions floating around.
To my knowledge there are currently three tracks on this
- The inets 2.6.x serie as part of OTP-R8-y (HTTP 1.0)
- The inets 3.0 version in OTP-P9 (adds HTTP 1.1 support)
- And what I started on sowap.soureforge.net
The latter one beeing based on the latest inets-3.0 version at the time
I started. If everything goes well the idea is that the
sowap.sourceforge.net version will be the one part of OTP-R9 when that
is released.

So, my own humble opinion would be to have a closer look at the latest
inets version and help out with that. One of the main design goals with
inets is to have a fast "core" with only the most basic HTTP
functionality and then allow for extensions, provided by the module
design. Thus I assume e.g. a "yaws" extension should be quite easy to
implement.


BR
Johan Blom
Mobile Arts




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list