kevin montuori wrote:
> additionally, i think that some consideration should be given to
> how mod_perl is packaged.
I think it's of crucial importance the fact that a distro as widespread
as RHLinux 6.x had mod_perl messed up. That has forced quite a lot of
developers that were trying to get their feet wet with mod_perl to get
in a complex compile sequence. That's a source of 'bad reputation', and
of php developers, as the included php was old but working ;)
I don't know how messed up are other distros regarding apache/mod_perl,
but making sure the main distros *do* get it right is paramount to make
mod_perl catch.
Another item that we should really have is a good (and somehow
sanctioned) RPM that replaces the apache rpm (or deb) included in broken
distros. Then we can include in the guide and related pages a link for
[broken-distro-name] users, so they get a suitable replacement with a
similar config. That's an important issue, because a redhat user has
other non-standard modules included in his rpm, such as PHP, and
compiling a *complete* apache, with mod_perl, php and the kitchen sink
is a daunting task -- and too high an entry price.
anyway, not an easy task ... mmhhh..
martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
