This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Subject: Re: RFC: mod_perl advocacy project resurrection From: martin langhoff <martin@scim.net> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 13:41:06 -0300 kevin montuori wrote: > additionally, i think that some consideration should be given to > how mod_perl is packaged. I think it's of crucial importance the fact that a distro as widespread as RHLinux 6.x had mod_perl messed up. That has forced quite a lot of developers that were trying to get their feet wet with mod_perl to get in a complex compile sequence. That's a source of 'bad reputation', and of php developers, as the included php was old but working ;) I don't know how messed up are other distros regarding apache/mod_perl, but making sure the main distros *do* get it right is paramount to make mod_perl catch. Another item that we should really have is a good (and somehow sanctioned) RPM that replaces the apache rpm (or deb) included in broken distros. Then we can include in the guide and related pages a link for [broken-distro-name] users, so they get a suitable replacement with a similar config. That's an important issue, because a redhat user has other non-standard modules included in his rpm, such as PHP, and compiling a *complete* apache, with mod_perl, php and the kitchen sink is a daunting task -- and too high an entry price. anyway, not an easy task ... mmhhh.. ===