On 12/4/05, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Garrett Rooney wrote: > > On 12/3/05, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I'd also like to brainstorm a better solution to running Rails/Django > >> applications inside of the httpd process than the SCGI/FastCGI solution > >> which most people use. > > > > Out of curiosity, what do you think is wrong with the current FastCGI > > method of running them? > > > > configuration. > for example in order for me to get typo running on my blog, I need 4 > rewrite rules. (and when I tried to do something slightly different, it > took me a good hour to configure it properly with all the rewrite magic)
Wouldn't it be better to fix/improve the configuration? Why should/would an 'in-process' request processor be easier to configure than an out-of-process one? Not all things can run inside httpd and for PHP I think it'd also be nice if it ran outside. > also when applications 'experts' like scott (the creator of typo) have > issues like > http://scottstuff.net/blog/articles/2005/07/20/apache-tuning-for-rails-and-fastcgi > > i think it isn't easy enough to run. > what I am after is something as simple as > > > RailsApp /foo/ rails-controller.rb [cache] [ENV=production] > > > which would just work as a in-process application... > making it as simple as running a PHP application is the goal. > > I don't like the trend i see with rails & django people saying apache is > hard to use and switching to other web servers.
