Why?

[Donald McLean]

There's a poll on Linked-In:

https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-is-your-favorite-scala-746917.S.5857014051980218372?trk=groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmp_746917

And I'm just really curious as to why people prefer Play so much? I love Lift, personally.

Is it:

Marketing?

Technical?

Logistical (better documentation)?

Is there something that we, as a community should be doing to help the situation?

Just curious,

Donald

[Neil Visnapuu]

I've built a fairly solid Lift based team, supporting a finance related product suite.  I love Lift, it's a great underpinning to what we do.

That said, Play is definitely packaged friendlier, at least superficially.  If I didn't know what I know, and was investing time into researching architectures, Play would likely resonate better.

As most folks know, product design and technical features are, sadly, only PART of the puzzle.  

--
--
Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
Code: http://github.com/lift
Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stuck? Help us help you: https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Peter Petersson]

On 04/10/2014 03:48 PM, Donald McLean wrote:

There's a poll on Linked-In:

https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-is-your-favorite-scala-746917.S.5857014051980218372?trk=groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmp_746917

+ 1 vote for Lift :)
best regards Peter Petersson

And I'm just really curious as to why people prefer Play so much? I love Lift, personally.

Is it:

Marketing?

Technical?

Logistical (better documentation)?

Is there something that we, as a community should be doing to help the situation?

Just curious,

Donald

[Aditya Vishwakarma]

Play has the traditional big fat, one size fits all, MVC style which is more familiar to people. The documentation + tooling, specially frontend tooling, is very good too. And yes, marketing is huge behind play. Almost every blog I see has some tutorial about play framework.

Aditya Vishwakarma

--

[Antonio Salazar Cardozo]

Marketing and logistics. I'm working with a couple of other people on both.

We're a pretty small team, and no one is paid to work on Lift. Play does not have the same limitation,

so they can make more splash and do more of what is traditionally considered the “boring” stuff faster,

etc. That leads to a larger community, which often leads to a larger team, etc.

I have some exciting stuff in the pipeline that I want to show soon, but there are several moving parts

that need to come together before there is something that can truly be shown. Meantime we're giving

Lift the actual framework some love, too ;)

As for whether there's something the community should be doing… Spreading the word is always a

good move. Blog about interesting things you're doing with lift, or interesting solutions. I'm particularly

bad at the second one, because it's tough to slot in with everything else in life hehe.

And of course, continue to help here on the list. We are all a better community for how respectful,

consistently constructive, and helpful this list is. We generally avoid flamewars, we respect everyone's

time and diverse obligations, we generally avoid architectural navel-gazing, and we put forward ideas

for how problems could be fixed rather than simply throwing out problems with the expectations that

others will fix them. That has made this community better than vastly many others in my experience,

and it's one of our greatest selling points as a framework, IMO.

Thanks,

Antonio

[ti com]

I don't know anything about play but maybe because it's part of the type safe stack? Or maybe because people get excited about web sockets? Maybe there is hype about stateless, or it uses more familiar api like scala future?
I don't know, it could be anything. All these things been discussed that lifts approach is better. So does it help to talk about what people like better?

--

[Gilberto Garcia]

At least, here in Brazil, the main argument in favour of play is:
  - It has support from typesafe

But marketing is a big factor that drives people towards play.

Another point, I think, is that people tend to go for more familiar paths when learning new things.

About documentation, we can argue if play really has the better one.

Lift cookbook provides great documentation for Lift - from basic to more advanced levels.
At least 3 new books were released last year about Lift.

My experience with typesafe's documentation is that they have the most basic examples documented but,
if you want to know about more advanced things, you'll be better with stack overflow.

only my two cents.

[Joe Barnes]

I'd also argue that typesafe is the greatest factor with people preferring Play.  That gives a lot of organizations a good feeling because they believe someone legit is behind it.  The packaging and starter-friendly documentation that has already been mentioned is also a big draw.  On the technical side, I suppose the way it is presented as stateless and integrated with akka helps them a lot.  I think someone else mentioned that the MVC paradigm that it follows is familiar to a large group of people.

All that being said, my cup of tea is Lift all day.  I'm actually working with a friend to build a simple web app and he wanted to use Play.  I really wanted to use Lift just so I knew we'd get the job done, but I took it as an opportunity to see what Play is all about.  I'm slowly writing up my excursion in a blog post that I'll be sure to share when I'm done.  Thus far, I've not been swayed. :)

Joe

[Andy C]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Donald McLean <dmcl...@gmail.com> wrote:

And I'm just really curious as to why people prefer Play so much? I love Lift, personally.

That probably should have been asked on Play's mailing list, since all of us here obviously prefer Liftweb :-P. To be 100% honest, I am absolutely blown away by http://hoplon.io which was presented here which fills certain essential gap. worth watching for anybody doing web. As I never rely on a single solution, Liftweb is my second pillar in case I use Scala.

And reason of Play being more popular: It is MVC with 1000000s developers believing this is The Web Architecture. I wish them good luck.

Best,
Andy

 

[Ben Phelan]

On Play vs Lift vs X ...

Play is ok, and the Play people are nice people but it's just so far behind.  Lift is still architecturally the best choice for any non-websocket webapp and probably always will be vs Play unless Play is rewritten from scratch (again - and maybe a few times for good measure).

If you did want to use websockets with a Scala backend Play still isn't a good choice - the Play websocket support has a couple of issues and since the Play guys advise against using websockets at all in their own mailing list I don't expect this to improve quickly.  For serious Scala + websockets currently Scalatra is probably the best choice since the core Scalatra team are dedicated to maintaining and improving their great Atmosphere integration.  

So for me Play isn't currently on the table, no matter what kind of web app I was building - there is always a superior choice.

On Lift vs The Community

From the inside Lift is clearly alive.  At v2.5/2.6 it is so full of excellent features that there's very little more I could ask of it, but it's still moving forward.

I've talked about this not-Lift phenomenon a couple of times in the committers list -- personally I think it is because from the outside it's hard to see what is going on with Lift.  When I talk to people who know Scala but not Lift tell me they think Lift is dead/dying.  All. The. Time.  This has been a thing for a couple of years now and a few other people have reported the same.

Leadership:  From the outside there's no clearly visible leadership since David partially abdicated.  

Future/Goals:  Although there are a bunch of people with goals for Lift's future and who are working on various things, details of these things are spread across various blogs, this list, the committers list, etc.  There is no single list of goals or outline for Lift's future and apparently we don't want one because people might complain if that list changed. (Seriously?  Which people?  The people who aren't picking up Lift because they think it is dying? :))

Docs:  Although a lot of core Lift features are actually very simple conceptually and easy to use in practice Lift can still be tricky to get into.  There's lots of documentation now but it's fragmented and there's not really a single, comprehensive, up-to-date source for the basics.  (Simply Lift was off to a promising start.  Perhaps this could be converted to a community-managed Django-book-style thing and featured more prominently on the homepage.)

Marketing & communication about Lift:

There are lots of questions on StackOverflow, Quora, etc, on Play vs Lift.  Since Lift is quite large and a lot of different people appreciate different parts of it, it might be helpful if more people shared their views on these.  I've never been interested in stackoverflow, but here are a couple of Quora questions I have bookmarked:

https://www.quora.com/Scala/Which-good-framework-can-I-choose-for-web-development

https://www.quora.com/Scala/How-can-we-choose-the-best-web-framework-based-on-scala-liftweb-vs-play

I don't think I've ever seen anyone refer to limited documentation as a logistical problem before, although it makes sense. :)

[Vasya Novikov]

This is a tough question because it might attract negative views. So,
you may even have good thoughts about a framework in general, but still
have some things to worry about it and remember them clearly in such a
topic.

So...

The main problem I had with Lift is the separation from the rest of the
(scala) world.
Where it can be seen:

* on the wiki. Wiki is not even moderated -- it's closed for all
non-commiters. You can't edit anything if you're not a commiter. What we
have in result? - outdated information even though some people may want
to edit it.

* policy regarding stackoverflow, github, IRC,... Is stackoverflow
advised? -- no, absolutely not. Thus, framework gets less advertisements
on such networks.

* is lift friendly to the rest of Scala community? And yes and no.
In general and to newbies -- it's friendly.
If you ask about akka or Future-s -- it quickly becomes less friendly.
`scala.actor` suck, `akka` may suck too, scala-2.11 may suck too, all
scala-libraries may suck too. Well, they really may suck. But many
people _do love_ scala. They spend time in it, they hope it'll improve
and they improve it. You cannot be in a good position by telling people
that everything except Lift sucks.

* contributors limitation of the source itself, historically. It's no
longer true, but I think it might be one of the reasons of such
separation growing on wiki, policies etc.

* author of scalareactive.org got banned for not being constructive and
dealing with people-s nerves while their health was at danger.
Absolutely not an easy question, but as a result I have one less library
to investigate about FRP. (I'm currently investigating scalaJs.)
It also may be personal -- I'm just interested in FRP and nafg did help
me many times at scackoverflow and IRC.

* publishing libraries later than the rest of the Scala world. If we're
not eager about Scala and its progress then that's expected. But this
can be easily seen and has consequences: liftweb doesn't get advertised
as a library supporting X.Y.Z+. This also can be a stopper for upgrating
your project scala version (see, for example, a message I posted about
2.11).


Resume.
I still think lift is a cool framework. And I actually think it's the
best one I've seen for a wide range of challenges.
I also hope that I did answer the question.
And I wish wiki would be open and the overall policy got less
centralized over time.

> --
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
> Code: http://github.com/lift
> Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
> Stuck? Help us help you:
> https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Lift" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com>.

[Diego Medina]

Some corrections and comments below:

* on the wiki. Wiki is not even moderated -- it's closed for all non-commiters. You can't edit anything if you're not a commiter. What we have in result? - outdated information even though some people may want to edit it.

This isn't true, anyone can edit the wiki, all you have to do is "become a watcher of the liftweb assembla project" and you can edit the wiki, this is an assembla thing, but again, any committer or non-committer can esit and contribute to the wiki, so the wiki may be outdated because people, anyone, doesn't take the time to update what they see outdated.

 

* policy regarding stackoverflow, github, IRC,... Is stackoverflow advised? -- no, absolutely not. Thus, framework gets less advertisements on such networks.

It;s true that we advice people to only ask questions on the mailing list, which helps us focus on one place to help users, but even then, I have seen at least a few committers who are on stackoverflow answering questions, it does come to a price, where some people go and check the number of questions about lift on stackoverflow and when they see a low number say "oh, nobody uses lift", but if a user is going to base his/her decision on that, then we can't help them. Lift is a different framework, with different technical ideas and also with different ways of managing the community around it, and as such, there will always be people who disagree with how we do things over here.

 

* is lift friendly to the rest of Scala community? And yes and no.
In general and to newbies -- it's friendly.
If you ask about akka or Future-s -- it quickly becomes less friendly. `scala.actor` suck, `akka` may suck too, scala-2.11 may suck too, all scala-libraries may suck too. Well, they really may suck. But many people _do love_ scala. They spend time in it, they hope it'll improve and they improve it. You cannot be in a good position by telling people that everything except Lift sucks.

Scala actors were so bad that they language itself dropped them, so while it may hurt some people, it seems there was some truth there, but let's not get confused here, if the committers didn't love Scala, there wouldn't be Lift, after all, Scala is the only language we actively support, even though there have been a lot of things wrong with it.

 

* contributors limitation of the source itself, historically. It's no longer true, but I think it might be one of the reasons of such separation growing on wiki, policies etc.

Again, this goes along the lines of Lift doing things differently, I hope you had the chance to see why the contributions we accept are so limited.

 

* author of scalareactive.org got banned for not being constructive and dealing with people-s nerves while their health was at danger. Absolutely not an easy question, but as a result I have one less library to investigate about FRP. (I'm currently investigating scalaJs.)
It also may be personal -- I'm just interested in FRP and nafg did help me many times at scackoverflow and IRC.

I'm skipping this one because talking about it would result in a never ending thread.

 

* publishing libraries later than the rest of the Scala world. If we're not eager about Scala and its progress then that's expected. But this can be easily seen and has consequences: liftweb doesn't get advertised as a library supporting X.Y.Z+. This also can be a stopper for upgrating your project scala version (see, for example, a message I posted about 2.11).

Sadly we depend on a lot of libraries in the scala community and getting them all to publish for the cutting edge scala versions is not always possible but fear not, I have some news on this front

 

Resume.
I still think lift is a cool framework. And I actually think it's the best one I've seen for a wide range of challenges.
I also hope that I did answer the question.
And I wish wiki would be open and the overall policy got less centralized over time.

I hope you are happy to know you can start helping on the wiki now :)

Thanks for expressing your ideas and hope I was able to clarify at least some of them.

 

On 2014-04-10 17:48, Donald McLean wrote:

There's a poll on Linked-In:

https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-is-your-favorite-scala-746917.S.5857014051980218372?trk=groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmp_746917

And I'm just really curious as to why people prefer Play so much? I love
Lift, personally.

Is it:

Marketing?

Technical?

Logistical (better documentation)?

Is there something that we, as a community should be doing to help the
situation?

Just curious,

Donald

--
--
Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
Code: http://github.com/lift
Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stuck? Help us help you:
https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Lift" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

an email to liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

<mailto:liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
--
Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
Code: http://github.com/lift
Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stuck? Help us help you: https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code

--- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Diego Medina
Lift/Scala consultant
di...@fmpwizard.com
http://fmpwizard.telegr.am

[Vasya Novikov]

Thanks! I did not know wiki is open. I remember that I tried to update
something there back at 2012 and I failed for some reason. Maybe I just
never got approved as a co-editor. Anyway, AFAIK, some users think that
CLA-s and other difficulties tend to reduce the community size. For
example, Linux Torvalds said so. Pity that assembla can't switch to
moderation.
And I'm glad that wiki is as open as you say it is.

About scala-actors, akka and Futures. Yes, I know that scala-actors
really do suck. That's why I mentioned them -- to be just about this.
But I still think that using separate tools for many areas is a kind of
centralization and that it does relate to the topic in question.

> Sadly we depend on a lot of libraries in the scala community and
getting them all to publish for the cutting edge scala versions is not
always possible but fear not, I have some news on this front

that's the most nice and detailed answer I've seen about 2.11 in lift.)
Personally I tried to compile liftweb on 2.11, but obviously there were
many incompatibilities and I failed to resolve them quick enough. (I
shouldn't succeed anyway, was just curious.)

> * author of scalareactive.org <http://scalareactive.org> got banned

> https://www.linkedin.com/__groups/What-is-your-favorite-__scala-746917.S.__5857014051980218372?trk=__groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&__goback=.gmp_746917

> <https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-is-your-favorite-scala-746917.S.5857014051980218372?trk=groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmp_746917>
>
> And I'm just really curious as to why people prefer Play so
> much? I love
> Lift, personally.
>
> Is it:
>
> Marketing?
>
> Technical?
>
> Logistical (better documentation)?
>
> Is there something that we, as a community should be doing to
> help the
> situation?
>
> Just curious,
>
> Donald
>
> --
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
> Code: http://github.com/lift

> Discussion: http://groups.google.com/__group/liftweb

> <http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb>
> Stuck? Help us help you:

> https://www.assembla.com/wiki/__show/liftweb/Posting_example___code

> <https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code>
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Lift" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
> it, send

> an email to liftweb+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
> <mailto:liftweb%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> <mailto:liftweb+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
> <mailto:liftweb%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>>.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/__optout
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

>
>
> --
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
> Code: http://github.com/lift

> Discussion: http://groups.google.com/__group/liftweb

> <http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb>
> Stuck? Help us help you:

> https://www.assembla.com/wiki/__show/liftweb/Posting_example___code

> <https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code>
>
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "Lift" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

> send an email to liftweb+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
> <mailto:liftweb%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/__optout
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

>
>
>
>
> --
> Diego Medina
> Lift/Scala consultant

> di...@fmpwizard.com <mailto:di...@fmpwizard.com>
> http://fmpwizard.telegr.am

>
> --
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
> Code: http://github.com/lift
> Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
> Stuck? Help us help you:
> https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Lift" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

> an email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com>.

[Peter Petersson]

Hi Vasya

It seems to me that you are passionated about Lift but that you worry
about the ways things is done in the Lift community, some of your
concerns is miss conceptions and I will take some time to try
enlightening you about them an hopefully you will come away a bit less
worry.
I wont be able to comment on all your concerns and as I don't have all
day some of my answers may only contain the essence of the "why" in the
concern at hand.

On 04/21/2014 12:43 PM, Vasya Novikov wrote:
> This is a tough question because it might attract negative views. So,
> you may even have good thoughts about a framework in general, but
> still have some things to worry about it and remember them clearly in
> such a topic.
>
> So...
>
> The main problem I had with Lift is the separation from the rest of
> the (scala) world.
> Where it can be seen:
>
> * on the wiki. Wiki is not even moderated -- it's closed for all
> non-commiters. You can't edit anything if you're not a commiter. What
> we have in result? - outdated information even though some people may
> want to edit it.
>

Quoting: "-- it's closed for all non-commiters. You can't edit anything

if you're not a commiter."

Well this is simply not true and you could have read the firs sentence
of the Lift wiki [1] to find out.

[1] https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb

> * policy regarding stackoverflow, github, IRC,... Is stackoverflow
> advised? -- no, absolutely not. Thus, framework gets less
> advertisements on such networks.

This mailing list is the pulse of the community, so asking questions
about Lift is best done on this list. It's absolutely awesome when
someone advertise Lift but that is better done in blog posts than on SO.
Just to be clear it's noting wrong with asking questions about Lift on
SO but you will probably find out that your questions will get a faster
and better answer on this mailing list. You can read more about the lift
community here [2]

[2] http://liftweb.net/community

>
> * is lift friendly to the rest of Scala community? And yes and no.
> In general and to newbies -- it's friendly.
> If you ask about akka or Future-s -- it quickly becomes less friendly.
> `scala.actor` suck, `akka` may suck too, scala-2.11 may suck too, all
> scala-libraries may suck too. Well, they really may suck. But many
> people _do love_ scala. They spend time in it, they hope it'll improve
> and they improve it. You cannot be in a good position by telling
> people that everything except Lift sucks.

The negative tone in this statement is not constructive, if you did some
research you would find that there are good reasons why the Lift
committers and it's community has chosen to avoid direct dependency on
some (or to many) external libraries. During the life time of the Lift
framework some of the more popular Scala libraries has undergone great
progress with low API friction and some has not and for Lift the goal
has always been to provide a stable long term solution for the community
and it's users, it has turned out to serve us well and as for that
reason Lift has a long history of proven concepts (sometimes even novel
and unprecedented in it's composition).

That said there is nothing stopping you from using Akka actors, Slick,
scalaz, Anti-XML, dispatch or any other Scala/Java/js/css library of
your liking with Lift.

>
> * contributors limitation of the source itself, historically. It's no
> longer true, but I think it might be one of the reasons of such
> separation growing on wiki, policies etc.

Read about contribution here [3]

[3]
https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Contributing#contributing_to_the_wiki

>
> * author of scalareactive.org got banned for not being constructive
> and dealing with people-s nerves while their health was at danger.
> Absolutely not an easy question, but as a result I have one less
> library to investigate about FRP. (I'm currently investigating scalaJs.)
> It also may be personal -- I'm just interested in FRP and nafg did
> help me many times at scackoverflow and IRC.
>
> * publishing libraries later than the rest of the Scala world. If
> we're not eager about Scala and its progress then that's expected. But
> this can be easily seen and has consequences: liftweb doesn't get
> advertised as a library supporting X.Y.Z+. This also can be a stopper
> for upgrating your project scala version (see, for example, a message
> I posted about 2.11).

Don't worry Lift will be built against Scala 2.11 wen all relevant
pieces is in place.

Good long term system design decisions has proven to be vital for Lift
to being able "to stay on top of things" however In any big code base
there are more or less a few external dependencies and so also in Lift,
consider this fact and pond on it's possible implications.

>
>
> Resume.
> I still think lift is a cool framework. And I actually think it's the
> best one I've seen for a wide range of challenges.
> I also hope that I did answer the question.
> And I wish wiki would be open and the overall policy got less
> centralized over time.

Awesome!
Trust in the decisions made by the Lift dev team and it's community.
I think if you read about the reason behind the contribution policy you
will probably find it to be balanced and making sense.

best regards Peter Petersson

[Peter Petersson]

... and wile I was composing this Diego already gave you some excellent
answers ;)

[David Pollak]

Donald,

Lift is different and that turns a lot of people off. It's difficult to come to a new language that's different and have a web framework that's really different. I did a presentation about it https://skillsmatter.com/skillscasts/2566-lift-baby

So, Play is a traditional MVC framework and that sits well with people and so they stick with what they know

Also, Lift's documentation is not great and that's a turn-off.

Also, Play is associated with TypeSafe and that gives it some additional visibility.

With all that being said, Lift is a technically solid product. When was the last time we did a dot-dot release... and the time before that? Lift has a very solid community... yes it's focused on this mailing list, but it's solid.

All in all, not too bad for a niche web framework sitting on top of a niche language.

My 2 cents.

David

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Donald McLean <dmcl...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

--
Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
Code: http://github.com/lift
Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stuck? Help us help you: https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Brick Alloy http://brickalloy.com

Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net

Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Blog: http://goodstuff.im

[Donald McLean]

As the author of a *production* SPA that uses Lift, clearly it IS technically solid. :-)

I guess my concern is that I don't want Lift to end up being the Betamax of Scala web frameworks.

Donald

[Diego Medina]

I had to lookup Betamax to find out what you meant :) I don't think the situation is that bad, lift is still in people's radars, otherwise they wouldn't even talk trash about it.

We know the community is alive,  the project keeps getting better.  I used to get really upset when someone would pick play instead of lift and then I got to know some of the people in positions to pick a framework and realized that in many cases it had nothing to do with technical reasons.

Thanks

Sent from my tablet
Diego

[Roch Delsalle]

I prefer Lift when it comes to frontend development. Spray is cool for Web-services dev, and PlayFramework is probably the "easiest" Scala Framework. 

Roch