> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ajit Deshpande [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 12:19 PM
> To: kevin montuori
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: RFC: mod_perl advocacy project resurrection
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 10:51:08AM -0500, kevin montuori wrote:
> > additionally, i think that some consideration should
> be given to
> > how mod_perl is packaged. although it's well documented (and
> > generally quite simple) there are three kits that need to be
> > compiled (apache, perl, mod_perl) before the simplest handler
> > can be tested. i think to an applications programmer who's
> [..]
>
> I think packaging is key here. For example If we can get
> RedHat to package
> the apache and mod_perl RPMs (albeit DSO) such that a basic
> set of handlers
> and modules just *work*, I think we will be whole lot better off.
I think if we could all agree on a standard newbie package and get RedHat
engineers to agree to it it might go a long way... I don't remember ever
seeing RedHat asking this list for advice on how it should package mod_perl
(Paul?)
not that they could ever really get everyone on the list to agree :) but I
think EVERYTHING=1 and a static build would be a majority consensus.
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
