walterbyrd wrote:
> *sigh* maybe I'll just use php until the web-hosters catch up, if they
> ever do.
The first general availability release of Apache 2.0 (2.0.35) appeared
in April 2002. There are many ISPs. Perhaps you should limit yourself
to those who lag behind less than four years? I can und
"walterbyrd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
>development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
>broken, or just plain sucking.
>
>Any truth to any of that?
mod_python is most definitely NOT the only way of using Python to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> walterbyrd wrote:
>
>>I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
>>development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
>>broken, or just plain sucking.
>>
>>Any truth to any of that?
>
>
> I replied to you over on the mod_python mailing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> One of the biggest problems is that a lot of ISPs still use Apache 1.3
> and so only mod_python 2.7.X is available on those platforms.
Yes, I think that is a big problem. I don't think django or turbogears
will work with apache 1.3. And it seems to me that practically
walterbyrd wrote:
> I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
> development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
> broken, or just plain sucking.
>
> Any truth to any of that?
I replied to you over on the mod_python mailing list when you reposted
the question t
walterbyrd wrote:
> Researching further, it looks to me like mod_python may only work well
> on apache 2.X.
mod_python works splendidly with Apache 2.0.x as well as Apache 1.3.x. There
is a different mod_python version for each Apache branch. The version for
Apache 2.0.x has newer features, but t
Shreekar Patel wrote:
> No, I've been using mod_python for a long time, and I haven't run in to
> any problems. In fact I use python server pages for my web development,
> which is much faster than python cgi scripts.
>
Researching further, it looks to me like mod_python may only work well
on ap
Michael S a écrit :
> I used it for various projects. It's alright.
> The only problem I had, was that I was unable to get
> mod_python and pysqlite to work together.
Seems there's a strange bug with pysqlite when you have both
mod_python/pysqlite and php5...
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/li
I used it for various projects. It's alright.
The only problem I had, was that I was unable to get
mod_python and pysqlite to work together.
Other than that it was pretty good.
--- walterbyrd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am considering python, instead of php, for
> web-application
> development
walterbyrd wrote:
> I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
> development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
> broken, or just plain sucking.
>
> Any truth to any of that?
Hi,
mod_python is Apache/Python Integration. AFAIK you can't use
it with a different
walterbyrd wrote:
> I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
> development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
> broken, or just plain sucking.
>
> Any truth to any of that?
No, I've been using mod_python for a long time, and I haven't run in to
any problems.
walterbyrd wrote:
> I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
> development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
> broken, or just plain sucking.
>
> Any truth to any of that?
>
Why don't you ask the very active mod_python mailing list that?
Like all systems m
I am considering python, instead of php, for web-application
development. I often see mod_python.criticisized as being borked,
broken, or just plain sucking.
Any truth to any of that?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
13 matches
Mail list logo
