[dmitriid]

So?

[Dylan16807]

So this post has absolutely zero context.

[smitty1e]

Try to give it some, get mod bombed. So it goes.

[iamcreasy]

I think what this application does add more context than its tech stack.

[dmitriid]

Your "context" was about as useful as noting that this post went out on a day of the week. Or that there's weather outside.

[lima]

You got downvoted the boring way.

[smitty1e]

Ya gotta laugh at this stuff.

[beaconstudios]

being LAMP stack doesn't make software bad or otherwise more likely to fail commercially. The whole web (excluding some older perl/cgi-bin stuff) was built on it before Rails became popular.

[ipaddr]

Being LAMP is a sign of a good project that probably will work out of the box.

Remember the P was for PHP or Perl.

[webmaven]

> Remember the P was for PHP or Perl.

Or Python.

[ipaddr]

You are right. Was it used for anything else? The m could be mysql or microsoft sql but rarely was anything aside from mysql (and postgres but the name never fit)

[Dylan16807]

I don't see anything in that comment about good or bad. I do see at least some information about what Phabricator is.

[eitland]

Point is the description is about as useful as describing a car as an cage with an engine and wheels.

Yes it is correct.

But it can be anything:

- a car

- a truck

- a trailer with a power generator

Phabricator was a (very) different take on the same class of tooling as GitLab: source code management, task management, code reviews etc integrated.

[Dylan16807]

And if I ask "What the heck is a camry?", then that vague description is much better than nothing.

> Phabricator was a (very) different take on the same class of tooling as GitLab: source code management, task management, code reviews etc integrated.

Great. If you made that comment 11 hours ago then maybe some downvotes on smitty1e would have been justified. Instead it's "how dare you improve the situation somewhat!".