News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch. Parent comment

Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by bad_user on Friday December 09, 2011 @07:27AM (#3333473)
Redis can be used for development on Windows. Other than that, people that are hosting software like Memcached, Apache, NGinx and PostgreSQL on Windows should be fired. If you're not up to it than you can always find other people to do it for you.

For convenience you could also run any Linux-specific software in VirtualBox or VMWare on the same machine. You could also install an X-Server on Windows and open Linux apps in their own window on the Windows desktop. I've done it, works great. And you can always find somebody to help out, you only need to ask. Haven't you heard? Virtualization is the future ;)

It is an author's right to devote his time to whatever the fuck he feels like doing. If he feels like there are more important things to work on, rather than Win32 support, then so be it.

If you can't stand this situation you can always port it yourself, send a patch, etc, etc... You can also be hard-core, like the Mono people that reimplemented .NET from scratch because Microsoft doesn't think of Linux as a useful target.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by CJefferson on Friday December 09, 2011 @08:19AM (#3333573)
"If you can't stand this situation you can always port it yourself, send a patch, etc, etc..."

Isn't the whole point of this article that Microsoft sent a patch, and it is being rejected, just to avoid supporting win32?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by bad_user on Friday December 09, 2011 @08:41AM (#3333635)
Read the article - the author is saying that the same functionality provided is already implemented in a simpler and safer way.

That's why they are rejecting the patch. Because it doesn't provide anything new while adding complexity. Not because they want to avoid supporting Win32.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by CJefferson on Friday December 09, 2011 @08:52AM (#3333662)
Surely any attempt to make code run under both POSIX and win32 is going to require adding more code and an abstraction layer?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by bad_user on Friday December 09, 2011 @11:12AM (#3334205)
More code and extra abstraction layers increase the cost of maintenance and even the cost of further developments, so when adding more code the benefits have to outweigh the increase in complexity. This is also the opinion given at the end of the article.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by CJefferson on Friday December 09, 2011 @02:47PM (#3335261)
OK, I'm confused.

So you are seeing that anyone who wants to see win32 support should stop moaning send a patch.

But then, any such patch would add extra code and an abstraction layer, so therefore must be rejected.

So, sending a patch isn't actually useful at all then.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Redis for win32 and the Microsoft patch by bad_user on Friday December 09, 2011 @02:58PM (#3335305)
Look, the author explains that the patch is incomplete, which I highlighted above and that it doesn't provide enough to the current functionality available already on Win32, but instead replaces a crucial component that has proven itself to work.

The patch will not make Redis behave well on Win32, Redis will still remain unusable for production environments and Redis already works well enough on Windows for development purposes.

Really, dismissing this patch is a no-brainer - and even though the author said that he prefers to keep it POSIX-only anyway, I'm sure they'll reconsider if they receive a proper patch that fixes the problem, but for the moment there is no such patch.

If there would be a patch that fixed the problem, this whole discussion would be a non-issue, even if the patch wouldn't get integrated in the main branch - somebody (if there indeed is interest) will create another branch specific for Win32 and everybody will be happy. But we can't even have a discussion of branching or not, because there is no such patch available.

So I don't see what's with all this arguing.

[ Parent | on HN ]