On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Robin Berjon wrote:
> No need to apologize, we've all got a lot to do. Is it
> just a matter of committing the cvs or is there more to
> be done ? I have a little bit of time between now and
> the middle of the month, I can help if need be.
jim took a snapshot of a subset of
At 21:12 06/07/2000 -0700, brian moseley wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
>> I think the new site was about to be committed but I
>> don't know what happened with that. One recent
>
>my apologies. i've been meaning to do it, but real life has
>gotten in the way. i'll have it done
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Robin Berjon wrote:
> I think the new site was about to be committed but I
> don't know what happened with that. One recent
my apologies. i've been meaning to do it, but real life has
gotten in the way. i'll have it done by the end of the
weekend.
> suggestion likely to make
At 09:15 07/07/2000 +0800, Gunther Birznieks wrote:
>At 08:36 AM 7/6/00 -0700, Graham TerMarsch wrote:
>>Matt Sergeant wrote:
>> > Well of course AxKit gives me the consistent layout, and Robin Berjon gave
>> > me the design. He also did a perl.apache.org one, but people didn't like
>> > it - said
At 08:36 AM 7/6/00 -0700, Graham TerMarsch wrote:
>Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > Well of course AxKit gives me the consistent layout, and Robin Berjon gave
> > me the design. He also did a perl.apache.org one, but people didn't like
> > it - said it was too graphicy or something. Thats at
> > http://ww
Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Well of course AxKit gives me the consistent layout, and Robin Berjon gave
> me the design. He also did a perl.apache.org one, but people didn't like
> it - said it was too graphicy or something. Thats at
> http://www.knowscape.org/modperl/
Is too bad, I think this one look
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Gunther Birznieks wrote:
>
> >
> >Take a look - hopefully you'll be impressed ;-)
> >
> >http://axkit.org/
> >
> >BTW: I'll be giving a 2 hour talk on AxKit at ApacheCon Europe in October.
>
> Holy s..t! this is a well-laid out site!! Could you do the same for
> perl.apache
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Gunther Birznieks wrote:
>
> >
> >Take a look - hopefully you'll be impressed ;-)
> >
> >http://axkit.org/
> >
> >BTW: I'll be giving a 2 hour talk on AxKit at ApacheCon Europe in October.
>
> Holy s..t! this is a well-laid out site!! Could you do the same for
> perl.apache
>
>Take a look - hopefully you'll be impressed ;-)
>
>http://axkit.org/
>
>BTW: I'll be giving a 2 hour talk on AxKit at ApacheCon Europe in October.
Holy s..t! this is a well-laid out site!! Could you do the same for
perl.apache.org? :)
BTW, if you are distributing as integration with GPL sof
On Wed, 5 Jul 2000, Paul Lindner wrote:
> I've been toying with using the Apache::ASP custom tag feature to
> support cold-fusion like applications. I don't think it will be too
> hard; reading the spec it appears you need to make a list of named
> queries and then use tags with #fieldname# ent
On Wed, 5 Jul 2000, Bas wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is probably gonna be a longish one. It's about coldfusion vs. the
> combination of apache/mod_perl, I'm hoping to find some people on the list
> who have some experience with both, and who maybe faced a similar question.
> I've been searching the
Paul Lindner wrote:
>
> > Hey Paul,
> >
> > I think you will have a problem with cold fusion templating
> > logic like if/else constructs. For these, I would recommend
> > having something like a ColdFusionCompat config setting, and we
> > could rip out some of these are parse time and convert th
Anyone looked at PHP???
Paul Lindner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 04:09:06PM -0700, Joshua Chamas wrote:
> > Paul Lindner wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMHO, mod_perl applications easily out-performed our CF apps.
> > > >
> > > > One plus for coldfusion, there seems to be more CF developers out there
On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 04:09:06PM -0700, Joshua Chamas wrote:
> Paul Lindner wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO, mod_perl applications easily out-performed our CF apps.
> > >
> > > One plus for coldfusion, there seems to be more CF developers out there (at
> > > least in Austin, TX) but that may be a sign th
Paul Lindner wrote:
>
> > IMHO, mod_perl applications easily out-performed our CF apps.
> >
> > One plus for coldfusion, there seems to be more CF developers out there (at
> > least in Austin, TX) but that may be a sign that very few people are using CF.
> >
> > My opinion: stick to mod_perl, it
On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 04:30:01PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I just left a company that used either mod_perl or coldfusion for our intranet
> development. I never did any coldfusion development but I did have to deal with
> maintaing the coldfusion server and apps.
>
> coldfusion crashed
I just left a company that used either mod_perl or coldfusion for our intranet
development. I never did any coldfusion development but I did have to deal with
maintaing the coldfusion server and apps.
coldfusion crashed several times in the three or four months I was involved
with it. We never c
17 matches
Mail list logo
