Caddy vs Puma: What are the differences?

# Key Differences Between Caddy and Puma

<Write Introduction here>

1. **Language Support**: Caddy is written in Go, while Puma is written in Ruby. This leads to differences in performance, resource usage, and scalability between the two web servers.
2. **Configuration Flexibility**: Caddy's configuration is more user-friendly and concise compared to Puma, which requires more detailed setup and configuration. This difference can impact ease of use for developers and system administrators.
3. **TLS/SSL Support**: Caddy offers automatic HTTPS by default through Let's Encrypt integration, simplifying the process of securing websites. Puma requires additional configuration for SSL/TLS certificates and HTTPS setup.
4. **Concurrency Model**: Puma uses a multi-process model where each worker runs in its own process, while Caddy utilizes a hybrid model with a single process handling multiple connections efficiently. This impacts how the web servers handle multiple requests under heavy loads.
5. **HTTP/2 Support**: Caddy has native support for HTTP/2, offering improved performance and efficiency for modern web applications. Puma requires additional configuration and setup to enable HTTP/2 support, which can introduce complexity for developers.
6. **Plugin Ecosystem**: Caddy has a robust plugin ecosystem that allows users to extend its functionality easily with various plugins. Puma, on the other hand, has a more limited selection of plugins and extensions available, potentially limiting customization options.

In Summary, Caddy and Puma differ in language support, configuration flexibility, TLS/SSL support, concurrency model, HTTP/2 support, and plugin ecosystem.