On Sep 7, 2014, at 12:51 AM, Kevin Mcintyre <kebin70@gmail.com> wrote:

Jelly performance factors below expectations.

I am not clear on the significance of this statement.

Can we say Copyable is the lowest order jelly? The notion that a copy holder can't ask "is my copy good anymore?"  makes it so.  Essentially root says, I'd prefer not to repeat unit of work nor keep track of the resulting copies, here have the original or resulting copy.

Asking whether your copy is good any more is a PB-level task.  Jelly itself is a separate layer which is about getting the right data to the right place, not keeping it updated.

My main issue is a copy-holder calling for a copy to determine is the copy is good anymore.  I know, see cacheable but it's problematic.

"problematic" is passive voice :-).  What are the problems?

At this point I'm unsure of what jelly actually does well.

Malheureusement, Jelly's main claim to fame is "it's better than pickle".  But with all this renewed interest in PB perhaps we'll get pre-deserialization schema enforcement and type checking, and then it will have some real advantages :).

who's the JellyCon2014 keynote speaker?

One day we will have a conference - Tx/Rx, of course - and there will be a talk on this.  But first we need several people in the community who wants their contribution to Twisted to be organization and community oriented rather than code ;-).