On Jul 16, 2008, at 6:10 AM, Scott Likens wrote:
I'll certainly agree with that. Getting mongrel working with
mod_proxy was essentially an exercise in Google and reading blogs.
Why is mod_proxy working with mongrel such an exercise?
Beats me. Perhaps you should refer to the first portion of my reply to
you last night.
It's clearly a problem, though. It's also a problem that the purpose
of Mongrel isn't made clear; you just have to take on faith that it's
something you need to do based on the sketchy installation guide.
Yes. And, frankly, Ruby + gems on most Linux distros is in such a
state that I end up maintaining my own Ruby install from source.
Given the pain of the recent security holes (for example), I find
that this is actually driving me to think I should can it and go
for the same suite of PHP apps as everyone else.
I will agree with that, as Debian Etch currently has Ruby 1.8.4(2? i
forget) with Rubygems 0.92. However is that Ruby's problem? or the
Linux distribution you chose?
It's definitely Ruby's problem if PHP, Perl, Python, etc., are all
running fine out of the box.
Here, you're defaulting back to a knee-jerk defense of what is clearly
your pet language. That has no place here. Compared to LAMP-stack
stuff, RoR applications are much harder to set up and deploy. They
require a totally different approach, and that approach is very poorly
documented. This isn't a controversial statement.
---
"Don't let your mongoose get cold or dirty, or it will die."
(Animals as Friends and How to Keep Them, by Shaw & Fisher, Dent 1939)
_______________________________________________
Typo-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/typo-list
