Richard,
Agree with all you say, it reflects my frustrations about a profession where
"simple, stable and reliable" is so readily dismissed as outdated.
Re your specific comment "I'm not sure why the one-process-per-task model has
fallen out of favor.". It may be because early web servers (an
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> Well, I suppose I don't consider CGI to be archaic. CGI is simple,
> concise, easy to administer, easy to implement (on both ends), efficient,
> and is supported by all web-servers (except nginx).
>
Thank you for the detailed insights. i fe
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:59 PM, wrote:
>
>> Despite my error, I find the simplicity of setting up a Fossil repo
>> (or better a set of repos) under cgi fantastic.
>>
>
> +1
>
> @Richard: out of historical interest, what was the motivation b
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:59 PM, wrote:
> Despite my error, I find the simplicity of setting up a Fossil repo
> (or better a set of repos) under cgi fantastic.
>
+1
@Richard: out of historical interest, what was the motivation behind adding
CGI support initially? (Despite CGI being archaic, it
On 29 May 2013 11:12, Richard Hipp - d...@sqlite.org
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:22 AM, MIURA Masahiro
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Nigel Bray wrote:
>> > I am struggling to see what is tripping me up when a single repository
>> > works
>> > fine, but multiple repos
5 matches
Mail list logo
