3 ms·

Just to understand what's going on in this article. The people at Phusion Passenger are comparing Puma and their offer, only to come to the conclusion that if y

Just to understand what's going on in this article. The people at Phusion Passenger are comparing Puma and their offer, only to come to the conclusion that if you've got money you should go for their paying offer and if you don't then it's a tie? Not that they're not to be trusted and can't be unbiased in their judgment, but I'd put more trust in a more independent study,

FooBarWidget 13y ago
That is not the conclusion. As you can see in the comparison, the pros and cons between Phusion Passenger open source and Puma are different. Depending on your needs, either Puma is better, or Phusion Passenger open source is better. That is not the same as a tie. But we are claiming that the Enterprise version is better than the both of them, with that one exception as documented on the page. However this should not be interpreted as us abandoning the open source version in favor of the Enterprise version. We are continuously developing the open source version as well. Since the launch of Phusion Passenger Enterprise, the open source version has gained quite some improvements as well. EDIT: after re-reading the conclusion, I see that it is kind of useless. Other than promoting Enterprise, it didn't say anything substantial. I've reworded the conclusion so that it's hopefully more useful for those who are not interested in Enterprise.
caboteria 13y ago
It certainly would have been more useful if it had a disclaimer at the beginning indicating that it was written by a Passenger developer. It's OK to have biases as long as you're up-front about them.
- FooBarWidget 13y ago
  You mean the URL (github.com/FooBarWidget/passenger) and the fact that the Github page says that the wiki belongs to the "passenger" repository, aren't enough of a disclaimer? The "License and price" section at the beginning is also worded in such a way that it should be clear that the text came from the Phusion Passenger authors.
  - rschmitty 13y ago
    To be fair, I only associated the name FooBarWidget with passenger after figuring out you are the author on the project. Any reason why you do not keep it with the company repo https://github.com/phusion https://github.com/phusion ?
    - FooBarWidget 13y ago
      Historical. The Phusion Passenger repository started in 2008, when Gitub did not yet support teams. We never moved it because there are so many links to FooBarWidget/passenger.
      - mtarnovan 13y ago
        I think Github will automatically set redirects for you if you move a repository around.
        FooBarWidget 13y ago
        Really? A few months ago when I tried to move a repo Github showed a big warning, explicitly telling me that they do not setup redirects. Maybe that has changed now.
        evanphx 13y ago
        Redirects are new, so probably.

FooBarWidget 13y ago

That is not the conclusion. As you can see in the comparison, the pros and cons between Phusion Passenger open source and Puma are different. Depending on your needs, either Puma is better, or Phusion Passenger open source is better. That is not the same as a tie. But we are claiming that the Enterprise version is better than the both of them, with that one exception as documented on the page. However this should not be interpreted as us abandoning the open source version in favor of the Enterprise version. We are continuously developing the open source version as well. Since the launch of Phusion Passenger Enterprise, the open source version has gained quite some improvements as well. EDIT: after re-reading the conclusion, I see that it is kind of useless. Other than promoting Enterprise, it didn't say anything substantial. I've reworded the conclusion so that it's hopefully more useful for those who are not interested in Enterprise.

caboteria 13y ago

It certainly would have been more useful if it had a disclaimer at the beginning indicating that it was written by a Passenger developer. It's OK to have biases as long as you're up-front about them.

FooBarWidget 13y ago
You mean the URL (github.com/FooBarWidget/passenger) and the fact that the Github page says that the wiki belongs to the "passenger" repository, aren't enough of a disclaimer? The "License and price" section at the beginning is also worded in such a way that it should be clear that the text came from the Phusion Passenger authors.
- rschmitty 13y ago
  To be fair, I only associated the name FooBarWidget with passenger after figuring out you are the author on the project. Any reason why you do not keep it with the company repo https://github.com/phusion https://github.com/phusion ?
  - FooBarWidget 13y ago
    Historical. The Phusion Passenger repository started in 2008, when Gitub did not yet support teams. We never moved it because there are so many links to FooBarWidget/passenger.
    - mtarnovan 13y ago
      I think Github will automatically set redirects for you if you move a repository around.
      - FooBarWidget 13y ago
        Really? A few months ago when I tried to move a repo Github showed a big warning, explicitly telling me that they do not setup redirects. Maybe that has changed now.
        evanphx 13y ago
        Redirects are new, so probably.