[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 26/07/06, Simon Waters <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Adrian Midgley wrote: > > > > Looks nice and simple.. > > 24,000 lines of advanced Perl is simple ?! Is that including the modules it pulls in? I don't remember it being *that* complex when I looked at it about 5 years ago, and I was a relative n00b then. Also compared to stuff like Slash, Nuke or PHPbb that is pretty simple - the code inside any of the flashy BBS is usually a godawful trainwreck - particularly the PHP ones which are always full of security holes. > I think software is like ducks paddling, to make it look effortless and > clean far more goes on unseen than you could ever imagine. Even more so on my current project - the aim of which is to be un-noticed :( Months of work, huge numbers of unit and regression tests, all so that customers can not see any problems :) Of course it also means we can start new projects with a documented, maintainable and tested infrastructure, and code that doesn't look like it was written by somebody who had only ever written some ASP or PHP rather than mission-critical software used by some very large companies. > > How about support? Preferably of the paid variety. Plone etc have an > > ecology, does this? > > Yes there is a Perl ecology, but it is smaller than you might think > given the amount of code they produce. Nothing in the code looks > especially particular to the program, so I expect any serious Perl > hacker could support and hack this code (Not sure I'd class myself there > yet, I could hack it, but the results might not be maintainable). Actually there are plenty of Perl people able to support most decent perl application - I can think of several people, myself included who can take on that sort of stuff. The thing is that most decent Perl people are currently so busy with work that we don't need to advertise for work, that or PHP software requires a ton more support ;) > It is kind of Aaron's bread and butter stuff. Yup. I've been meaning to look at mwForum so I could port it to Maypole or at least have it use Template Toolkit and more modern CPAN stuff - hopefully it's already moved in that direction a bit since I saw it back around 2000. > Mod-perl is a pain hosting wise, means either it should be managed by > the hosting company, or run in a virtual/dedicated server. But a virtual server can be had for under 20 quid in the UK and half that in the states, and then you can put a lot of stuff on that server, not to mention installing whatever other applications you want - so you can mix a mod_perl application with some zope or plone or whatever much nicer than trying to jump through hoops installing stuff on a shared hosting system. > But it isn't essential by the looks of it, and if you are doing it on your own > server > it is pretty easy (especially if you don't have tonnes of other complex > Perl code on the same server). Should be a piece of cake. > Wonder what it is about threaded discussion forums that make them so > unpopular?! My guess is the lousy threading display in most of them, and > that email with an archive does the job just as well if people follow > the rules. I find email much easier - particulalrly GMail since I don't have to reload the page to see any changes, threading works nicely, etc. A. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html