RE: Apache::Request for CGI? (was: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy)

2003-07-02 Thread Jesse Erlbaum
Hi Joe --

 +1.  Scripting _inside_ the server opens up possibilities that
 are unimaginable to folks who are content confining themselves 
 to the lowest common denominator (CGI).

Perhaps you could bullet-point a few of these possibilities for those of
us who are confined by our lack of imagination?


TTYL,

-Jesse-


--

  Jesse Erlbaum
  The Erlbaum Group
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Phone: 212-684-6161
  Fax: 212-684-6226





Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-07-01 Thread Perrin Harkins
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 12:18, Peter B. Ensch wrote:
 It's been suggested to me that content generating
 apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging,
 authentication Etc. should be implemented as 
 mod_perl handlers. 
 
 What is the opinion of the group?

I'm late to the party, but here's an old post of mine that sums up my
opinion:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperlm=95440118003848w=2

- Perrin


Apache::Request for CGI? (was: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy)

2003-07-01 Thread Joe Schaefer
Perrin Harkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[...]

 I'm late to the party, but here's an old post of mine that sums up my
 opinion:
 
 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperlm=95440118003848w=2

+1.  Scripting _inside_ the server opens up possibilities that
are unimaginable to folks who are content confining themselves 
to the lowest common denominator (CGI).

That said, apreq-dev is looking for someone to adopt and 
develop the CGI port of libapreq-2/Apache::Request. I'm shooting
for a developer release of libapreq-2 before OSCON, and it'd be 
_really_ cool if we had a functional CGI port available.

-- 
Joe Schaefer



A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Peter B. Ensch
I'm beginning to develop apps under mod_perl. I'm
curious as to how people decide between coding for
Apache::Registry vs. mod_perl handlers.

It's been suggested to me that content generating
apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging,
authentication Etc. should be implemented as 
mod_perl handlers. 

What is the opinion of the group?

Regards,
P


-- 

^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Peter Ensch,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   A-1140   (214) 480 2333
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^


Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ged Haywood
Hi there,

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Peter B. Ensch wrote:

 I'm beginning to develop apps under mod_perl. I'm
 curious as to how people decide between coding for
 Apache::Registry vs. mod_perl handlers.

Use Apache::Registry only if you have to in order to get legacy CGI
scripts working.

 It's been suggested to me that content generating
 apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging,
 authentication Etc. should be implemented as 
 mod_perl handlers. 

All new code should use handlers.

73,
Ged.



Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ken Y. Clark
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ged Haywood wrote:

 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:25:23 +0100 (BST)
 From: Ged Haywood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Peter B. Ensch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

 Hi there,

 On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Peter B. Ensch wrote:

  I'm beginning to develop apps under mod_perl. I'm
  curious as to how people decide between coding for
  Apache::Registry vs. mod_perl handlers.

 Use Apache::Registry only if you have to in order to get legacy CGI
 scripts working.

  It's been suggested to me that content generating
  apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging,
  authentication Etc. should be implemented as
  mod_perl handlers.

 All new code should use handlers.

 73,
 Ged.

I wouldn't be so strict about such definitions.  If you're only
looking to generate content, then I don't see a problem with writing
standard CGI scripts and running them under A::R.  If you stick with
strict and warnings and follow the gotchas listed in The Guide[1],
you should be fine.  If you also choose to code carefully, you can
use the same script under mod_perl or not without changing anything
(if that's important to you).

Or am I missing something?  At CSHL, all our Apache servers are
compiled with mod_perl, but Lincoln still has us write most everything
as CGI scripts.  It's easy and works just fine for us.  Also saves
having to add Location directives to httpd.conf everytime you want
to add a new script.

Whatever works for you, I say.  But mayhap I'm too permissive.

ky

[1]-http://perl.apache.org/guide


Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ged Haywood
Hi Ken,

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ken Y. Clark wrote:

 On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ged Haywood wrote:
 
  All new code should use handlers.
 
 I wouldn't be so strict about such definitions.

I didn't say must.  :)

 Or am I missing something?

You will get better performance from handlers and you can do more
with them.  I wouldn't deliberately build unnecessary limitations
into a new system if I had any choice in the matter.

 Whatever works for you, I say.  But mayhap I'm too permissive.

Well I'm probably not permissive enough... :)

73,
Ged.