Re: Flaky software
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:51:26PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote: "GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GLE What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's GLE list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only GLE programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb GLE questions? Anyone can and should post, provided they do their homework first. [...] When someone subscribes to this list, maybe we should _stress_ in the welcome message the following things: 1. Read the modperl traps page 2. Read the modperl guide 3. Read the CGI to modperl migration page And with appropriate URL pointers for each.. Ajit
Re: Flaky software
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Ajit Deshpande wrote: On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:51:26PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote: "GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GLE What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's GLE list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only GLE programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb GLE questions? Anyone can and should post, provided they do their homework first. [...] When someone subscribes to this list, maybe we should _stress_ in the welcome message the following things: 1. Read the modperl traps page 2. Read the modperl guide 3. Read the CGI to modperl migration page And with appropriate URL pointers for each.. Well, I think Ask has added a welcome page, I've prepared about a year ago. It should be posted to every new subscriber. Isn't it there? Any of the new subscribers can confirm that they didn't receive the _stressing_ info? Thanks! ___ Stas Bekman mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.singlesheaven.com/stas Perl,CGI,Apache,Linux,Web,Java,PC at www.singlesheaven.com/stas/TULARC www.apache.org www.perl.com == www.modperl.com || perl.apache.org single o- + single o-+ = singlesheavenhttp://www.singlesheaven.com
Re: Flaky software
On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, Stas Bekman wrote: [...] Well, I think Ask has added a welcome page, I've prepared about a year ago. It should be posted to every new subscriber. Isn't it there? Any of the new subscribers can confirm that they didn't receive the _stressing_ info? A clued new subscriber just sent me some speling corrections to the text, so I would think it works. :-) - ask -- ask bjoern hansen - http://www.netcetera.dk/~ask/ more than 60M impressions per day, http://valueclick.com
Re: Flaky software
On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Baker wrote:
if (defined @foo_in) {
# On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
#
# defined @bar and defined %bletch are almost never correct, and any
# seasoned Perl hacker knows to watch for those as a red flag.
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Baker wrote:
Regarding your question of Nov 3 [regarding `make test' failure],
I don't see any cause for alarm. Are you seeing problems on actual
code, or only [sic] in the test harness?
All of my production mod_perl systems are fine, even though I've
never bothered to look into why make test was failing.
Are you planning to use Apache::src in your system?
= In 1998, Lincoln Stein and Doug MacEachern wrote:
=
= ``Any messages about failed tests, however, are cause for concern.
=If you see such a message, you should rerun the tests with the
=verbose flag (make test TEST_VERBOSE=1). You can try to track
=down the problem yourself, or post the results to the mod_perl
=mailing list...''
= -- the Eagle Book
Dear Mr. Baker,
If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing
then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In
the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have
only development systems that haven't gone wrong yet, and that a lot
of other people might be in the same boat, thanks to you.
This has cost me nearly four weeks already, and I dread to think how
many other people have wasted their time because you never bothered.
For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to
the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is
written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives.
Earlier in November, Stas Bekman put out a message saying something
like: "Come on, guys, let's get some of this stuff to work".
Surely no-one can be content with the state things are in at present?
Kind regards,
Ged Haywood.
Re: Flaky software
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, G.W. Haywood wrote: Dear Mr. Baker, If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have only development systems that haven't gone wrong yet, and that a lot of other people might be in the same boat, thanks to you. I find this a rather harsh attitude towards someone on a free list trying to help people. However I'm more bothered with the second half of your message: This has cost me nearly four weeks already, and I dread to think how many other people have wasted their time because you never bothered. For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives. Earlier in November, Stas Bekman put out a message saying something like: "Come on, guys, let's get some of this stuff to work". Surely no-one can be content with the state things are in at present? We're software developers. We're never content with the present state of things. However there's currently only my company providing commercial support for mod_perl, and we haven't been able to put anything back into the project yet due to other work (which will hopefully change in the coming months). If you require commercial support for installation and application development we'd be more than willing to help out (subject to contract), and of course we'll feed back any changes into the mod_perl tree. But I don't think you can really expect anything more from this free list and the very helpful and knowledgable people on it. -- Matt/ Details: FastNet Software Ltd - XML, Perl, Databases. Tagline: High Performance Web Solutions Web Sites: http://come.to/fastnet http://sergeant.org Available for Consultancy, Contracts and Training.
Re: Flaky software
Give me a break, G.W.
You think nobody is happy with mod_perl? You think it's okay to take
the mis-speakings of a good Perl contributor (JB) out of context and try
to use them as some kind of evidence (for what?)? That's mean-spirited
and inaccurate, and I don't feel like hearing it. "[sic]"? God. Stop.
If this is how you evaluate tools, then please consider your evaluation
complete and move on to some other tool and some other conversation.
We'll keep on using the best stuff.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (G.W. Haywood) wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Baker wrote:
if (defined @foo_in) {
# On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
#
# defined @bar and defined %bletch are almost never correct, and any
# seasoned Perl hacker knows to watch for those as a red flag.
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Jeffrey Baker wrote:
Regarding your question of Nov 3 [regarding `make test' failure],
I don't see any cause for alarm. Are you seeing problems on actual
code, or only [sic] in the test harness?
All of my production mod_perl systems are fine, even though I've
never bothered to look into why make test was failing.
Are you planning to use Apache::src in your system?
= In 1998, Lincoln Stein and Doug MacEachern wrote:
=
= ``Any messages about failed tests, however, are cause for concern.
=If you see such a message, you should rerun the tests with the
=verbose flag (make test TEST_VERBOSE=1). You can try to track
=down the problem yourself, or post the results to the mod_perl
=mailing list...''
= -- the Eagle Book
Dear Mr. Baker,
If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing
then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In
the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have
only development systems that haven't gone wrong yet, and that a lot
of other people might be in the same boat, thanks to you.
This has cost me nearly four weeks already, and I dread to think how
many other people have wasted their time because you never bothered.
For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to
the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is
written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives.
Earlier in November, Stas Bekman put out a message saying something
like: "Come on, guys, let's get some of this stuff to work".
Surely no-one can be content with the state things are in at present?
Kind regards,
Ged Haywood.
------
Ken Williams Last Bastion of Euclidity
[EMAIL PROTECTED]The Math Forum
Re: Flaky software
I'm brand new to the list, so I thought I'd better ask a question before making another post: What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb questions? I've never run Mod Perl in a real life setting but like the concept. I own several domains on commercial servers that I plan to eventually move to my own server, so am trying to get acquainted the the best way to set it up and administer it. If this isn't a list for those just learning Mod Perl, please point me in the right direction. Thanks, Glen On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Matt Sergeant wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, G.W. Haywood wrote: Dear Mr. Baker, If you have "never bothered" to find out why `make test' is failing then obviously you don't have any "production mod_perl systems". In the light of the comments from Mr. Schwartz, it looks like you have only development systems that haven't gone wrong yet, and that a lot of other people might be in the same boat, thanks to you. I find this a rather harsh attitude towards someone on a free list trying to help people. However I'm more bothered with the second half of your message: This has cost me nearly four weeks already, and I dread to think how many other people have wasted their time because you never bothered. For me, your slapdash approach has polluted the mod_perl resource to the extent that now I don't trust any of it. The entire exercise is written off to experience and I am looking for alternatives. Earlier in November, Stas Bekman put out a message saying something like: "Come on, guys, let's get some of this stuff to work". Surely no-one can be content with the state things are in at present? We're software developers. We're never content with the present state of things. However there's currently only my company providing commercial support for mod_perl, and we haven't been able to put anything back into the project yet due to other work (which will hopefully change in the coming months). If you require commercial support for installation and application development we'd be more than willing to help out (subject to contract), and of course we'll feed back any changes into the mod_perl tree. But I don't think you can really expect anything more from this free list and the very helpful and knowledgable people on it.
Re: Flaky software
"GLE" == Glen Lee Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GLE What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's GLE list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only GLE programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb GLE questions? Anyone can and should post, provided they do their homework first. There are plenty of resources at http://perl.apache.org to start with. If you are still stuck, just explain to the list in _detail_ what you tried, what happened or did not happen compared to what you expected or wanted to happen. Most likely you'll get helpful responses. The key is to show that you've tried to solve the problem using the plethora of documentation first. This is genarally true of all mailing lists, I believe.
Where to start with mod_perl (was Re: Flaky software)
Glen Lee Edwards wrote: I'm brand new to the list, so I thought I'd better ask a question before making another post: What is the specific purpose/slant of this list? Is it a developer's list? A general list to help those running Mod Perl? Are only programming geniuses allowed to post, or can the average joe ask dumb questions? I've never run Mod Perl in a real life setting but like the concept. I own several domains on commercial servers that I plan to eventually move to my own server, so am trying to get acquainted the the best way to set it up and administer it. If this isn't a list for those just learning Mod Perl, please point me in the right direction. No this is just the place for beginners. First you should apply a minimum of effort by reading the guide at http://perl.apache.org/guide. Perhaps you might also want to buy the book at http://www.modperl.com/. After that you probably won't have any basic questions left :) But if you do, feel free to ask them here. -jwb -- Jeffrey W. Baker * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Critical Path, Inc. * we handle the world's email * www.cp.net 415.808.8807
RE: Flaky software
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Gary Carroll wrote: Maybe you should try http://www.microsoft.com i hear there is this great new thing called 'active server pages'. ive been meaning to check that out but i keep having to write mod_perl code for non-production systems. damn those paying customers.
