Robert Walker wrote in post #976399: > Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote in post #976394: >> Interesting. I had "rails s" work out of the box on a new Ruby >> 1.9.2/Rails 3 installation (granted, this was on Mac OS, not Windows). >> I'd use Passenger if Mongrel and Thin didn't work, but I still see >> little point in bothering with it for development if the lighter-weight >> alternatives function. (I can't see how having Nginx is an advantage >> unless you're actually doing Nginx redirects and such.) > > I use passenger standalone for the following reasons: > > 1. It's not WebBrick.
Why is that an advantage? > 2. It's not Mongrel (i.e. it wasn't created by Zed Shaw). Why is that an advantage? (Yeah, Zed pisses me off, but I'm not abandoning Mongrel only for that reason.) > 3. I've never tried Thin. I think it's becoming the new Mongrel. > 4. It's dead simple to install. Not as simple as Mongrel being installed with Rails automatically... > 5. It's just as easy to launch as anything else. > 6. For at least some of the reasons listed here: > http://www.modrails.com/documentation/Users%20guide%20Standalone.html Those are wonderful reasons for using Passenger in production (which I do). None of them brings the slightest advantage to development. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] Sent from my iPhone -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
