On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, Stas Bekman wrote:
[...]
> Well, I think Ask has added a welcome page, I've prepared about a year
> ago. It should be posted to every new subscriber. Isn't it there? Any of
> the new subscribers can confirm that they didn't receive the _stressing_
> info?
A clued new subscri
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Ajit Deshpande wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:51:26PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > > "GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > GLE> What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's
> > GLE> list? A general list to help thos
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:51:26PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > "GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> GLE> What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's
> GLE> list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only
> GLE> programming geniu
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Gary Carroll wrote:
> Maybe you should try http://www.microsoft.com
i hear there is this great new thing called 'active server
pages'. ive been meaning to check that out but i keep having
to write mod_perl code for non-production systems. damn
those paying customers.
> "G" == G W Haywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
G> If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing
G> then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems".
G> In the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you
G> have only development systems tha
Glen Lee Edwards wrote:
>
> I'm brand new to the list, so I thought I'd better ask a question before
> making another post:
>
> What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's
> list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only
> programming geniuses allowed t
> "GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
GLE> What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's
GLE> list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only
GLE> programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb
GLE> questions?
A
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, G.W. Haywood wrote:
[snip snip]
> For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to
> the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is
> written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives.
Hey, Jeffrey Baker didn't write mod_
I'm brand new to the list, so I thought I'd better ask a question before
making another post:
What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's
list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only
programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb
Give me a break, G.W.
You think nobody is happy with mod_perl? You think it's okay to take
the mis-speakings of a good Perl contributor (JB) out of context and try
to use them as some kind of evidence (for what?)? That's mean-spirited
and inaccurate, and I don't feel like hearing it. "[sic]"?
"G.W. Haywood" wrote:
> Dear Mr. Baker,
>
> If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing
> then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In
> the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have
> only development systems that haven't gon
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Dear Mr. Baker,
>
> If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing
> then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In
> the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have
> only development syst
> For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to
> the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is
> written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives.
Maybe you should try http://www.microsoft.com
g-
> On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Baker wrote:
>
> if (defined @foo_in) {
# On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
#
# defined @bar and defined %bletch are almost never correct, and any
# seasoned Perl hacker knows to watch for those as a red flag.
> On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Ba
14 matches
Mail list logo
