The state of the spreadsheet wasn't constant.
We played with the weights.
What I posted was just where it was left after a meeting 9 months ago.
Yes, we definitely weight against our feelings of how we failed to employee Twisted Python. This was our experience, are you suggesting we shouldn't consider our experiences when evaluating something?
It really came down to a choice between pursuing a JVM based system, and Node.js.
Yup, we probably did want to do something new. But guess what, its worked. I'm sure we would have haters the other direction if we were posting about how Node.js has failed us, but it hasn't, yet.
Re:The switch: Python to Node.js
by andrewcooke on Sunday December 18, 2011 @11:28AM
(#3366873)
i'm surprised that you chose a technology so similar to one that you had problems with before. especially when the deciding factor seems to have been "it's exciting" rather than "it does the job well". yes, you can argue that "exciting" is important to attract a top-notch team, but then i am not sure why a top-notch team would have problems with twisted (and not have the same general issues with node).
how will node fix the issues you had with twisted?
Could you clarify what `Velocity', `Correctness' mean?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AvBGESHWxhk2dHJ2...
i can only begin to imagine the conversations a year down the line:
- how did you decide this?
- we used a spreadsheet. science!
- so you weighted against the asynchronous approach that confused your developers earlier?
- actually, we put most weight on it being an exciting new technology.
- oh.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvBGESHWxhk2dHJ...