RE: Apache::Request for CGI? (was: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy)

2003-07-02 Thread Jesse Erlbaum
Hi Joe -- > +1. Scripting _inside_ the server opens up possibilities that > are unimaginable to folks who are content confining themselves > to the lowest common denominator (CGI). Perhaps you could bullet-point a few of these possibilities for those of us who are confined by our lack of imagin

Apache::Request for CGI? (was: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy)

2003-07-01 Thread Joe Schaefer
Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > I'm late to the party, but here's an old post of mine that sums up my > opinion: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl&m=95440118003848&w=2 +1. Scripting _inside_ the server opens up possibilities that are unimaginable to folks wh

Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-07-01 Thread Perrin Harkins
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 12:18, Peter B. Ensch wrote: > It's been suggested to me that content generating > apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging, > authentication Etc. should be implemented as > mod_perl handlers. > > What is the opinion of the group? I'm late to the party, but here's a

RE: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Dmitri Bichko
>All new code should use handlers. I wouldn't necessarily agree, A::R has a few advantages. As some have already mentioned portability is one of them, and this includes running the same scripts command line, not just under legacy CGI systems. Perhaps more important is the speed of development, A:

Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ged Haywood
Hi Ken, On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ken Y. Clark wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ged Haywood wrote: > > > All new code should use handlers. > > I wouldn't be so strict about such definitions. I didn't say "must". :) > Or am I missing something? You will get better performance from handlers and you c

Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ken Y. Clark
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Ged Haywood wrote: > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:25:23 +0100 (BST) > From: Ged Haywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Peter B. Ensch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy > > Hi there,

Re: A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Ged Haywood
Hi there, On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Peter B. Ensch wrote: > I'm beginning to develop apps under mod_perl. I'm > curious as to how people decide between coding for > Apache::Registry vs. mod_perl handlers. Use Apache::Registry only if you have to in order to get legacy CGI scripts working. > It's bee

A::Registry vs. mod_perl handler philosophy

2003-06-20 Thread Peter B. Ensch
I'm beginning to develop apps under mod_perl. I'm curious as to how people decide between coding for Apache::Registry vs. mod_perl handlers. It's been suggested to me that content generating apps should be done under A::R, whereas logging, authentication Etc. should be implemented as mod_perl han