Doug MacEachern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'd rather see:
Perl main
This is a cool idea - I assume it means that any package can be
specified, and the default is Apache::ReadConfig.
I think that would place a little meme-fleck into people's brains to
remind them that the default package is
On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
I was thinking that in 2.0 we could have two different configuration
containers, where PerlConf will replace the Perl from 1.x, and
introducing Perl to do something else.
i'd rather see:
Perl main
or
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
but as you said we have this already, and it doesn't take the problem
away. You have to remember to declare the package when you just want to
run some code and switch back to Apache::ReadConfig when you want to do
the configuration. To me it makes
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
users don't read the documentation thoroughly, and even if they do,
chances are that the only thing they will rememember after reading the
docs is that Perl can run any code.
right, docs won't be read, so Perl should behave as it did in 1.x, code
is
-Original Message-
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:28 AM
To: modperl-2.0 dev-list
Subject: Perl vs PerlConf
I was thinking that in 2.0 we could have two different
configuration
containers, where PerlConf will replace the Perl
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Geoffrey Young wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:28 AM
To: modperl-2.0 dev-list
Subject: Perl vs PerlConf
I was thinking that in 2.0 we could have two different
configuration
