Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
--On 28. November 2005 13:28:19 +0100 Gerhard Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I'm a little bit puzzled why there are growing Number of Mails telling that the support for FastCGI will disappear in the future. Why is this. I am running multiple sites that are hybrides of apache/php and zope. It's very easy to set up such a config with mod fastcgi and Apache. It works just fine and very stable, even on heavy load. The posibility to Easy integrate Zope in existing apache/php server was one of our main reasons to use Zope. This is not the recommended solution (at least not since several years). There are no plans to remove FastCGI but it is no longer recommended and supported. But this reminds me that we could officially deprecated it and remove it safely after two release cycles (Zope 2.11). -aj pgp7DIkg6Co2l.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On 28 Nov 2005, at 12:28, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but mod_proxy does open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same connection for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing load, this can become a Problem. Well, it's not "a way to do it", it's *the* way. I highly doubt that your assertion about using more connections than just one is a problem, under any circumstance. All very large production sites that I ever dealt with use mod_rewrite/mod_proxy. It simply is not a problem. Or do you have proof? jens ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 12:43:44PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > > On 28 Nov 2005, at 12:28, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > >I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but > >mod_proxy does > >open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same > >connection > >for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing > >load, this > >can become a Problem. > > Well, it's not "a way to do it", it's *the* way. Thats a real good argument. There is no *the* way. Every situation is different and having as mutch possibilities as possible is allways the best way to do it. > I highly doubt that your assertion about using more connections than > just one is a problem, under any circumstance. All very large > production sites that I ever dealt with use mod_rewrite/mod_proxy. It > simply is not a problem. Or do you have proof? Im runnig a very large site with 4 users and a peak arround 60 Requests per second. Having to call connect end all the routines that come with it is quite an increased load. Why. FastCGI work perfectly and efficiently. Thats exactly the usecase Fastcgi was developed for. In none of the Postings is an reason why FastCGI ist bad and therefore not supported in the future. Just to say "so it is" is not an Answer. So my question is still there. Bye Estartu Gerhard Schmidt| Nick : estartu IRC : Estartu | Fischbachweg 3 || PGP Public Key 86856 Hiltenfingen | EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on request Germany|| pgp4uCwucIzhm.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On 28 Nov 2005, at 13:05, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 12:43:44PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 28 Nov 2005, at 12:28, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but mod_proxy does open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same connection for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing load, this can become a Problem. Well, it's not "a way to do it", it's *the* way. Thats a real good argument. There is no *the* way. Every situation is different and having as mutch possibilities as possible is allways the best way to do it. It's a matter of resources, plain and simple. No one has stepped forward to support it, so it atrophied. If you think it's a great thing to keep, volunteer. jens ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 01:07:49PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > > On 28 Nov 2005, at 13:05, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > > >On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 12:43:44PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > >> > >>On 28 Nov 2005, at 12:28, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > >>>I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but > >>>mod_proxy does > >>>open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same > >>>connection > >>>for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing > >>>load, this > >>>can become a Problem. > >> > >>Well, it's not "a way to do it", it's *the* way. > > > >Thats a real good argument. There is no *the* way. Every situation > >is different and having as mutch possibilities as possible is > >allways the > >best way to do it. > > It's a matter of resources, plain and simple. No one has stepped > forward to support it, so it atrophied. If you think it's a great > thing to keep, volunteer. I would if I had the time and the knowlege. But I don't see a Problem with the Code right now. As I said i runs here perfectly smooth. Bye Estartu Gerhard Schmidt| Nick : estartu IRC : Estartu | Fischbachweg 3 || PGP Public Key 86856 Hiltenfingen | EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on request Germany|| pgpTIRPlMin9i.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On 28 Nov 2005, at 13:25, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: It's a matter of resources, plain and simple. No one has stepped forward to support it, so it atrophied. If you think it's a great thing to keep, volunteer. I would if I had the time and the knowlege. But I don't see a Problem with the Code right now. As I said i runs here perfectly smooth. "It works" and "is supported" are two different things. "Is supported" also means there are people who will come forward and help out when the code breaks or when people ask questions about it. As you have seen yourself, no one does. The answer is (and will remain, unless someone volunteers): Use at your own peril. jens ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
(Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 08:28:56AM -0500) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote/schrieb/egrapse: > From: Gerhard Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm a little bit puzzled why there are growing Number of Mails telling > that the support for FastCGI will disappear in the future. Why is this. > > I am running multiple sites that are hybrides of apache/php and zope. It's > very easy to set up such a config with mod fastcgi and Apache. Our perception of reality seems to differ a lot. Setting up hybrid sites with RewriteRules / mod_rewrite and VHM in Zope is incredible easy, much easier than configuring fastCGI in httpd.conf. (And I'm not even counting having to compile fastcgi and hooking it into apache.) In helping relative newbies (to zope|apache) to configure their "zope gehind apache" setup on #zope (irc.freenode.net)I found out that life is much easier with 2 rewriterules. You will need rewriterules anyway if you want to force /manage access to https. And afer the rewrite rule "witch" was running, "zope behind apache" support on #zope has dwindled down a lot. > It works > just fine and very stable, even on heavy load. Here my experience differs a lot from yours it seems. > The posibility to Easy integrate Zope in existing apache/php server was one > of our main reasons to use Zope. > > I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but mod_proxy does > open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same connection > for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing load, this > can become a Problem. This is the fun part. Only a couple of weeks ago I grew bored having to restart / reinvestigate / sacrifice dead chicken for our one legacy zope instance that was run through fastcgi. Not really high load on the server, but high load on the admin due to apache? zope? getting stuck somehow. > Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:05:22 +0100 > In none of the Postings is an reason why FastCGI ist bad and therefore not > supported in the future. Just to say "so it is" is not an Answer. Experiences may differ, see above. For me it's "fastcgi, never again". It likely was great at some point in the past, but there is better stuff now. I value the undisturbed time that I can advance our company codebase too high, I don't want to be interrupted all the time with "XY hangs". As someone else mentioned, it's up to you! Regards, Sascha ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
Bitte schick das auf die Liste. Ich habe keine Lust solche Diskussionen privat zu führen. Danke, Andreas --On 28. November 2005 14:05:22 +0100 Gerhard Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 12:43:44PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 28 Nov 2005, at 12:28, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > I know there is a way to do just the same with mod_proxy, but > mod_proxy does > open new connection for every request while fastcgi uses the same > connection > for all requests. The is no problem on low load. But with growing > load, this > can become a Problem. Well, it's not "a way to do it", it's *the* way. Thats a real good argument. There is no *the* way. Every situation is different and having as mutch possibilities as possible is allways the best way to do it. I highly doubt that your assertion about using more connections than just one is a problem, under any circumstance. All very large production sites that I ever dealt with use mod_rewrite/mod_proxy. It simply is not a problem. Or do you have proof? Im runnig a very large site with 4 users and a peak arround 60 Requests per second. Having to call connect end all the routines that come with it is quite an increased load. Why. FastCGI work perfectly and efficiently. Thats exactly the usecase Fastcgi was developed for. In none of the Postings is an reason why FastCGI ist bad and therefore not supported in the future. Just to say "so it is" is not an Answer. So my question is still there. Bye Estartu - --- Gerhard Schmidt| Nick : estartu IRC : Estartu | Fischbachweg 3 || PGP Public Key 86856 Hiltenfingen | EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on request Germany|| pgpBlgWqyNx6l.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
--On 28. November 2005 13:28:20 + Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 28 Nov 2005, at 13:25, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: It's a matter of resources, plain and simple. No one has stepped forward to support it, so it atrophied. If you think it's a great thing to keep, volunteer. I would if I had the time and the knowlege. But I don't see a Problem with the Code right now. As I said i runs here perfectly smooth. "It works" and "is supported" are two different things. "Is supported" also means there are people who will come forward and help out when the code breaks or when people ask questions about it. As you have seen yourself, no one does. The answer is (and will remain, unless someone volunteers): Use at your own peril. I agree. There should be one supported way to achive a goal. In the past we had at least three methods to run Zope (fortunately we kicked PCGI support in the past). My suggestion is to deprecate FCGI officially in the docs and through a deprecation warning and to kick it at some time (not necessarily after two release cycles). So people can still use but they should know that they are using a deprecated feature...objections? -aj pgp6VbjvePiN5.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On 28 Nov 2005, at 14:23, Andreas Jung wrote: I agree. There should be one supported way to achive a goal. In the past we had at least three methods to run Zope (fortunately we kicked PCGI support in the past). My suggestion is to deprecate FCGI officially in the docs and through a deprecation warning and to kick it at some time (not necessarily after two release cycles). So people can still use but they should know that they are using a deprecated feature...objections? The deprecation warning should point out that mod_rewrite is the common way to achieve this goal and that FastCGI is plain unsupported. jens ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 03:23:04PM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: > > > --On 28. November 2005 13:28:20 + Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >On 28 Nov 2005, at 13:25, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > >>>It's a matter of resources, plain and simple. No one has stepped > >>>forward to support it, so it atrophied. If you think it's a great > >>>thing to keep, volunteer. > >> > >>I would if I had the time and the knowlege. But I don't see a Problem > >>with the Code right now. As I said i runs here perfectly smooth. > > > >"It works" and "is supported" are two different things. "Is supported" > >also means there are people who will come forward and help out when the > >code breaks or when people ask questions about it. As you have seen > >yourself, no one does. The answer is (and will remain, unless someone > >volunteers): Use at your own peril. > > I agree. There should be one supported way to achive a goal. In the past we > had at least three methods to run Zope (fortunately we kicked PCGI support > in the past). My suggestion is to deprecate FCGI officially in the docs and > through a deprecation warning and to kick it at some time (not necessarily > after two release cycles). So people can still use but they should know > that they are using a deprecated feature...objections? Sure I object. Why should perfectly working code be removed. There is no alternativ for heavy loaded sites which need integration of apache and zope. mod_proxy is no alternativ because it raises the load even further. Bye Estartu - Gerhard Schmidt | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TU-München| WWW & Online Services | Tel: 089/289-25270| Fax: 089/289-25257| PGP-Publickey auf Anfrage pgpwSrYnShhnN.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On 28 Nov 2005, at 14:52, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: Sure I object. Why should perfectly working code be removed. There is no alternativ for heavy loaded sites which need integration of apache and zope. mod_proxy is no alternativ because it raises the load even further. Sorry, I have to call "Bullshit" on the assertion that mod_proxy raises the load in any horrible way. I have been using Zope for more than 6 years and no one has ever made this claim or provided proof that this is so. jens ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
--On 28. November 2005 15:52:25 +0100 Gerhard Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sure I object. Why should perfectly working code be removed. There is no alternativ for heavy loaded sites which need integration of apache and zope. mod_proxy is no alternativ because it raises the load even further. I've seen lots of heavy loaded Zope sites - I've not seen a single one using FastCGI. Can you give us some number about the FastCGI performance compared to the standard mod_rewrite approach? Let numbers speakBut please read carefully...I wrote about deprecating the module but not about removing it as in my original posting. We want o make clear that FCGI is not supported. You are of course free to use it as long as you need. -aj pgpxmCqVb51yR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 04:09:31PM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: > > > --On 28. November 2005 15:52:25 +0100 Gerhard Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >Sure I object. Why should perfectly working code be removed. There is > >no alternativ for heavy loaded sites which need integration of apache > >and zope. mod_proxy is no alternativ because it raises the load even > >further. > > > > I've seen lots of heavy loaded Zope sites - I've not seen a single one > using FastCGI. Can you give us some number about the FastCGI performance > compared to the standard mod_rewrite approach? Let numbers speak I don't have exakt numbers. We started with pcgi and had heavy problems under load. They disapeared with the fastCGI module coming wird zope 2.6 i gues. I ve tried mod_proxy back than but had many problems. I can not test on the Production system as there are 4 users on the system and we have enougth Problems with Readconflictes and Session problems. > But please read carefully...I wrote about deprecating the module but not > about removing it as in my original posting. We want o make clear that > FCGI is not supported. Yes but if its deprecated it can disapear from any new version. And thats an situation i'm not very comfortable with. > You are of course free to use it as long as you need. I know. I will read me in the FCGIServer and see if I can understand how its work. But my time is Limited. (Running and developing a portal for i 4 user with 3 Fulltime workers isn't that easy). Bye Estartu Gerhard Schmidt| Nick : estartu IRC : Estartu | Fischbachweg 3 || PGP Public Key 86856 Hiltenfingen | EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on request Germany|| pgp2lPpn79f7a.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 04:29:22PM +0100, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > I don't have exakt numbers. We started with pcgi and had heavy problems > under load. They disapeared with the fastCGI module coming wird zope 2.6 > i gues. I ve tried mod_proxy back than but had many problems. I can not > test on the Production system as there are 4 users on the system and > we have enougth Problems with Readconflictes and Session problems. I'm not surprised you had problems with PCGI, it was known to be extremely slow. AFAIK it ran zope in single-threaded mode so concurrency was terrible. It sounds like you have concluded that, because FCGI is faster than PCGI, then FCGI must also be faster than mod_rewrite / mod_proxy. That's just not logical. p.s. If you're having session problems and read conflicts with 2.6, you should strongly consider upgrading to *at least* 2.7.3 and maybe 2.8. Heavy use of sessioning is still not perfect (see Dennis Allison's recent threads), but it is *much* better since 2.7.3. In addition, ReadConflictErrors are greatly reduced since the release of ZODB 3.3, which first shipped with Zope 2.8. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 11:06:35AM -0500, Paul Winkler wrote: > On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 04:29:22PM +0100, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: > > I don't have exakt numbers. We started with pcgi and had heavy problems > > under load. They disapeared with the fastCGI module coming wird zope 2.6 > > i gues. I ve tried mod_proxy back than but had many problems. I can not > > test on the Production system as there are 4 users on the system and > > we have enougth Problems with Readconflictes and Session problems. > > I'm not surprised you had problems with PCGI, it was known to be > extremely slow. AFAIK it ran zope in single-threaded mode so > concurrency was terrible. > > It sounds like you have concluded that, because FCGI is faster than > PCGI, then FCGI must also be faster than mod_rewrite / mod_proxy. > That's just not logical. No, I just described the way we came to fastcgi and that it solved some of the Problems back than. I pretty sure that mod_proxy is much better than pcgi was. But logic tells me that it can't be better than fastcgi. Building a new connection costs time and CPU power and as the this connections have to be build for each request the impact grows with the number of requets. > p.s. If you're having session problems and read conflicts with 2.6, > you should strongly consider upgrading to *at least* 2.7.3 and maybe 2.8. > Heavy use of sessioning is still not perfect (see Dennis Allison's > recent threads), but it is *much* better since 2.7.3. > In addition, ReadConflictErrors are greatly reduced since the > release of ZODB 3.3, which first shipped with Zope 2.8. We are running zope 2.7.8 at the moment and working on mirgating to 2.8.x at the moment exaly for this reasons. Bye Estartu Gerhard Schmidt| Nick : estartu IRC : Estartu | Fischbachweg 3 || PGP Public Key 86856 Hiltenfingen | EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on request Germany|| pgpcTtGXzcgnf.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
Gerhard Schmidt wrote: I pretty sure that mod_proxy is much better than pcgi was. But logic tells me that it can't be better than fastcgi. Well, you logic is apparently different from everyone elses ;-) I'm with the everyone-else here, so quite whining about FCGI unless you want to maintain it... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
--On 28. November 2005 16:09:31 +0100 Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've seen lots of heavy loaded Zope sites - I've not seen a single one using FastCGI. Can you give us some number about the FastCGI performance compared to the standard mod_rewrite approach? Let numbers speakBut please read carefully...I wrote about deprecating the module but not about removing it as in my original posting. We want o make clear that FCGI is not supported. You are of course free to use it as long as you need. Effective from Zope 2.9 I marked FCGI as deprecated - both in the documentation and through a deprecation warning in the sources. Please note that it does not mean that the FCGI might go away automatically in the future. This is basically a reminder for people using FCGI that there is a better way (in our opinion) to run Zope under Apache than using FCGI. -aj pgp3NCEpzd4W3.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.
+---[ Andreas Jung ]-- | | Effective from Zope 2.9 I marked FCGI as deprecated - both in the | documentation and through a deprecation warning in the sources. Please note | that it does not mean that the FCGI might go away automatically in the | future. This is basically a reminder for people using FCGI that there is a | better way (in our opinion) to run Zope under Apache than using FCGI. This of course assumes the entire world runs Apache. -- Andrew Milton [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
