[asterisk-users] How does extensions.lua compares to extensions.conf ?

[Paul Belanger]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:04 AM, George Joseph
<george.joseph at fairview5.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Paul Belanger
> <paul.belanger at polybeacon.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Olivier <oza.4h07 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > How does extensions.lua compares to extensions.conf or extensions.ael on
>> > stability, performance and features ?
>> >
>> > Would you recommand  extensions.lua as an easy/easier way to access
>> > memcached, redis or equivalent ?
>> >
>> > Thoughs ? Comments ?
>> >
>> The lack of replies should give you your answer.  Extensions AEL and
>> LUA don't get much action these days, I'm sure there are a few people
>> that use them but extensions.conf has way more code coverage from a
>> testing POV.
>>
>> Your better off using AGI if you want to leverage redis or memcached.
>>
> Actually, I use Lua dialplans in several production systems.  Some are used
> in conjunction with traditional dialplans and some are the only source of
> dialplans.  They've always been rock solid.   I actually find it easier to
> configure even a moderately complex dialplan than the traditional dialplan
> syntax.
>
Cool, you are in the minor on that one.  My only caution about using
them about be the lack of support if you had issues.

-- 
Paul Belanger | PolyBeacon, Inc.
Jabber: paul.belanger at polybeacon.com | IRC: pabelanger (Freenode)
Github: https://github.com/pabelanger | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pabelanger