Stas 99.9% of users do *not* need to use this workaround. So that
Stas issue is moot if you ask me.
Four out of my five biggest customers *will* need to have both
modperl1 and modperl2 in the same Perl installation tree on their
development machines, because they'll need to start looking at
I would like to support Randal's contention (if not his tone) that
indeed, in real-world mod_perl commercial situations that I'm familiar
with (say about 8), 80% of those real-world users will want to have both
mod_perl 1 and mod_perl 2 installed concurrently due to the
generally-accepted
Hi Folks
It gets worse :-(.
Apache::Test can't be upgraded...
Server Version: Apache/2.0.50 (Win32) mod_perl/1.99_15-dev Perl/v5.8.4
Apache::Test V 1.13 installed in the sane directory
/perl/site/lib/Apache/
Apache::Build V 0.01 installed in the pathological directory
Admit it, Stas, The wheels have fallen off you nasty hack re namespaces.
Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Just fix it!
this kind of barb is really counterproductive, as have been many, many of
the remarks directed at Stas over the past two weeks. I can't imagine how
anyone would
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:50:39 -0500
Geoffrey Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Admit it, Stas, The wheels have fallen off you nasty hack re
namespaces.
Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Just fix it!
this kind of barb is really counterproductive, as have been many, many
of the
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Frank Wiles wrote:
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 10:21:01 -0600
From: Frank Wiles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Geoffrey Young [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: modperl@perl.apache.org
Subject: Re: [summary] The Conflict of mp1 vs mp2 vs mp22 vs ... vs mpNN
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:50:39 -0500
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe Schaefer wrote:
[...]
Looks very promising to me. Is there a way to tell PAUSE to index
mod_perl's Apache::* modules from a bundle? If so, that might
provide a decent solution for both mod_perl and libapreq
(and other Apache::*
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Randy Kobes wrote:
[...]
There's still mod_perl.pm in both packages, though. In mp2,
this is just something to define the version, and also to
provide a NAME pod section (if I remember correctly, this
was inserted for the benefit of
I'm going to chime in, as someone working on a suite of modules that are
intended to eventually work with apache 1.x and 2.x. First, I agree with
this:
On 12/31/04 2:27 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
For the moment, I'm asking just that the release of mod_perl 2.0 be put
on hold until this problem,
Stas == Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stas 99.9% of users do *not* need to use this workaround. So that
Stas issue is moot if you ask me.
You keep saying this like you believe it. In fact, the number keeps
getting closer to 100% each time.
This is pure, fabricated *fiction*.
Four out
John Siracusa wrote:
On 12/31/04 4:40 PM, Stas Bekman wrote:
Finally you don't want to use it - don't use it. It's an open source
software, it will succeed or fail by *its own merits* and not because the
infrastructure has a long known problem but is not willing to evolve.
And to repeat this
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Four out of my five biggest customers *will* need to have both
modperl1 and modperl2 in the same Perl installation tree on their
Bullcrap - I would say that sep perl installs is not enough!
Personally I would hate to work for anyone who does insists
on dev/testing on live
Stas 99.9% of users do *not* need to use this workaround. So that
Stas issue is moot if you ask me.
Randal You keep saying this like you believe it. In fact, the number
keeps
Randal getting closer to 100% each time.
Randal This is pure, fabricated *fiction*.
For me, this ends up being the sane
Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
--
Meanwhile I've found a solution proposed by Andreas 1.5 years ago, which
might work as a better workaround from all the ones proposed so far:
14 matches
Mail list logo
