> I hate to be a naysayer, but this doesn't look sufficiently different from
> the other options to merit adding it to CPAN.
hi, thanks for your comments. i was expecting some such
naysaying, and understand your point. but, i still
disagree and think that simplicity *is* a valid
difference. i had looked at many other modules, and i
know other people who have as well but want a simpler
alternative.
most of the mod_perl/template packages out there are
not basic building blocks-- they lie in some
uncomfortable area between building blocks and full
content-management systems. i don't mean to knock them
at all, but for some people's needs these are way to
complex and bloated.
> The trouble is, there are already too many of these
> and it looks an awful lot like Apache::ePerl, or
> Text::Template.
Text::Template probably is the most similar existing
package, but it is not made for mod_perl. someone well-
versed in mod_perl could build a mod_perl wrapper of it
fairly quickly, but they or especially someone new to
mod_perl shouldn't have to. (i don't know of any such
wrapper existing in CPAN...)
if i'm not mistaken, Apache::ePerl builds a new
interpreter, which also seems like overkill for many
needs. (i'd like to try it out, but it won't compile
for lack of perl >=5.003-- i'm using 5.6.1 :). i want a
perl-only implementation, that doesn't need a new c lib.
> At the moment you may think there's a need for it
> because it's simpler and smaller, but it will
> almost certainly grow over time.
i can't say that no features will ever be added, but i
think it is fair to say that it will always remain much
lighter and smaller. i will not add database access,
XML-hooks, or new syntax/tags, and it will always be a
straight perl implementation.
so, that's my elaboration. i really don't want to
create mess in CPAN and appreciate efforts to prevent
that, but imho this is a useful, non-superfluous
addition. if someone knows of something more similar,
or if there is no positive feedback, i will certainly
reconsider.
peter
