RE: Templating system opinions (CGI::Application in connection with either HTML::Template or Template::Toolkit)
Hey Randal -- Maybe because it competes with OpenInteract, which is far more established. I don't really think OI and CGI-App are in competition at all. OI attempts to be a uber-framework, a la Mason -- or maybe more like ColdFusion or WebObjects.CGI::Application just focuses on web application state management. CGI::Application doesn't try to bolt on anything else. The developer can choose their favorite modules for templating system, database interface, object persistence, session management, etc. CGI-App is specifically made to allow developers to choose from the best available CPAN libraries, rather than to pre-select for them. You could probably use CGI::Application to implement part of OpenInteract, but you wouldn't use one in lieu of the other. They're not really comparable at all. TTYL, -Jesse- -- Jesse Erlbaum The Erlbaum Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 212-684-6161 Fax: 212-684-6226
Re: Templating system opinions (CGI::Application in connection with either HTML::Template or Template::Toolkit)
Dave == Dave Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave I'm curious as to why the combination of CGI::Application and Dave HTML::Template hasn't taken off ... CGI::Application seems to allow a Dave software developer to create an entire CGI app that can be stored and Dave distributed as a module on CPAN, but only a couple such app/modules Dave have been so added. Maybe because it competes with OpenInteract, which is far more established. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Re: Templating system opinions (CGI::Application in connection with either HTML::Template or Template::Toolkit)
Hi, That was really interesting to look at. OpenInteract is really impressive. I guess there is always a cost to having a big do it all type of system. That is what made me avoid Mason, it just blew my head off for complexity. Now it is true, I am looking for a bit more than what CGI::Application offers out of the box, but it may well end up being worthwhile to just extend rather than convert. I really appreciate the simple philosophy that HTML::Template and CGI::Application follow. One question, how do you judge that OpenInteract is more established? Is does look like it is actively developed, but I never heard of it before, and I couldn't find much indication of how popular it is. Thanks, Eric At 09:23 AM 2003-07-23, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: Dave == Dave Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave I'm curious as to why the combination of CGI::Application and Dave HTML::Template hasn't taken off ... CGI::Application seems to allow a Dave software developer to create an entire CGI app that can be stored and Dave distributed as a module on CPAN, but only a couple such app/modules Dave have been so added. Maybe because it competes with OpenInteract, which is far more established. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! Lead Programmer D.M. Contact Management 250.383.0836
