Isnt it interesting to know how many, happy, users modperl has? Michel
> Op 18 mrt. 2021 om 06:07 heeft Fred Moyer <f...@redhotpenguin.com> het > volgende geschreven: > > Longer response here. > > So I'm happy to be another active PMC member still involved. As > someone with a growing family, my time is limited, but not too much to > review and lend a +1 or feedback. I think that may be the case for a > few of the folks on this list. I'd like to see Steve Hay lead the > future of mod_perl project as I know a lot of the old guard have > personal duties now that take precedence. > > mod_perl is not a new Apache project. It's approaching two decades, > close to the age of the Apache httpd project itself. It was a core > driver in developing my career in software, as well as many key > professional relationships associated there. I remember a *lot* of > weekends early in my career hacking on mod_perl for *fun* - the coding > was the reward, as well as the community feedback. > > There are still many shops out there using mod_perl, but not much new > development, which makes sense. The project is in maintenance mode, > and there are developers willing to support needed releases as Adam > mentioned. If you are developing a new project, you should not use > mod_perl. But if you are maintaining legacy mod_perl infrastructure, > we will not leave you behind. > > The open source project model has changed significantly, especially > over the last ten years. IMHO, while the ASF model was instrumental in > the rise of open source projects into commercial environments, more > recent approaches such as those supported by the Linux Foundation > (which is *definitely* more commercially supported, and reflected by > the platitude of industry sponsors and resources) have achieved > greater growth levels in the short term. Will they still be here in 20 > years? No idea. > > A takeaway from my reflections there is that the ASF can benefit from > a bit less formality in structure to keep up with the new kids on the > block. I'm just a mostly inactive PMC member, but I think it's clear > that the project rules are preventing us keeping up with the needed > leadership changes. > >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:02 PM Fred Moyer <f...@redhotpenguin.com> wrote: >> >> Happy to continue being a maintainer. Longer response coming soon :) >> >>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 7:39 PM Adam Prime <adam.pr...@utoronto.ca> wrote: >>> >>> I think if you want to discuss alternatives, then a new thread would be >>> the place to do that. >>> >>> With regards to plug being pulled, I think that it is up to the >>> community if, when, and how that happens. That's what the point of this >>> thread is. If there aren't people that are committed enough to the >>> project for whatever reason to step up and keep it from going to the >>> attic, then that's what will happen. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/17/2021 9:50 PM, Jim Albert wrote: >>>> Not that I want to be the guy that says it sounds like we'll be pulling >>>> the mod_perl plug at any time the right scenario arises, but is it >>>> reasonable to have a discussion here on mod_perl alternatives inline >>>> with the various means of using mod_perl from the low level means of >>>> interfacing with the Apache server to the quick and dirty stuff >>>> (ModPerl::PerlRun, I believe to keep Perl and modules in memory). >>>> >>>> For those drawing the same conclusions from this thread as me, I've seen >>>> mod_fcgid proposed as an alternative, but I haven't yet played with it. >>>> Anyone with similar thoughts would ideally be looking for something that >>>> doesn't require months of redeveloping to a proposed replacement to >>>> mod_perl. >>>> >>>> I like mod_perl and it does a good job for what I use it for, but if we >>>> have no one developing, it sounds like we're waiting for the catalyst to >>>> come along that puts and end to it. EG.. some future Apache >>>> incompatibility. I'd really like someone with mod_perl authority to >>>> tell me I'm wrong, but my take on Adam's reply pretty much leaves me >>>> with that conclusion. I don't see another way to draw a better conclusion. >>>> >>>> Jim >>>>
