MJ Ray wrote: > GARY SEVIOUR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Mason no good? (there is/was atleast one member of bristolbathpm using it). >> > > I remember Mason from years ago. I think the drawback is that it's > mod_perl, which is less common than python CGI. > > >> Personally I think writing your own framework when you have a job to >> do other than write frameworks is a bad idea. I have worked with an >> "in-house" framework before (in PHP), [...] >> > > Yes, I share that bad experience (a previous developer on one site I > took over support for had taken a PHP framework example from a > magazine and extended it to meet their features, then concealed that). > > I'd prefer to avoid writing my own, which is why I was looking for a > straightforward framework, preferably in perl where I know the > relevant modules and web host support situation already and shouldn't > get a surprise. Seemed a reasonable question on a pm list... >
I prefer CGI::Application because it's lightweight, pure perl, and you can easily bundle the modules in with your program so whether the host has CGI::Application installed already isn't an issue. Give it a go:- http://cgi-app.org/ Whether in hosting environments python CGI or more available than mod_perl could be debatable. I'd say there isn't that much in it. Also a quick check shows mason can run as CGI:- http://www.masonhq.com/ Still for simplicity using CGI::Application which utilizes CGI.pm and HTML::Template, I think it'll be hard to beat. Lyle _______________________________________________ BristolBathPM mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.bristolbath.org/mailman/listinfo/bristolbathpm
