Re: [Blog post] Lapis vs Ophal vs Sailor vs Turbolua (The race for a Lua web framework)

[Hisham <h@...>]

On 2 August 2015 at 01:08, Fernando Paredes García
<fernando@develcuy.com> wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I wrote a quick comparison of all those frameworks and would like have your
> feedback:
>
> http://ophal.org/content/30

Even at first glance, the list is a bit too biased, isn't it?

For instance, you're comparing "web frameworks", and you list "is a
CMS" as a pro for your own project and "it is not a CMS" for all
others. Since you are comparing web frameworks, not content management
systems, this does not make sense. For many people, _not_ bundling an
entire CMS with the framework is a pro.

The list of Pros for Ophal is also inflated: for example, it lists
"Cross-platform" and "LuaJIT support". Sailor and Lapis, as they
support Lua 5.1, obviously support LuaJIT as well, and both are also
cross-platform, but you did not add those to their lists. You also
have a bullet saying "Web framework (you can build other things than
CMS stuff)" — well, this applies to all of them. And a quick search
for "lapis docker" returns a lot of results, so count "easy to install
with Docker" there as well. So it looks very forced that all the
others have 4 "pros" and only Ophal has 9.

I also note that you're listing "requires LuaRocks" as a "con". I
understand some people might not like it so I don't dispute that, but
one might also argue that _not_ being available via LuaRocks could be
counted as a "con" as well. But still, Ophal's own documentation
recommends using LuaRocks for installing its dependencies:
https://github.com/ophal/core/blob/master/INSTALL.md

I hope you take the criticism constructively. Thanks for sharing!

-- Hisham