From: Zach Dennis <zdennis@...>
Date: 2004-03-12T07:53:48+09:00
Subject: Re: convincing a webhost to support ruby

Con:

Debian packages aren't the fastest to reflect stable releases. Your hosting
provider may only wish to use Debian stable packages. Hence Debian still
installs Ruby 1.6.7 and Perl 5.6.


Good Luck,

Zach






-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hubbart [mailto:discord@mac.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:44 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: convincing a webhost to support ruby


Hi all,
I've been putting together an argument to convince my webhost to
support ruby and eruby on their servers. Right now, they have ruby
1.6.7 installed, with no extras (ie., no mod_ruby, eruby, irb,
anything).

Based on past threads here, I'm thinking that FastCGI is the way to go.
So I'm planning on suggesting that they:

- Update Ruby to the latest stable version (which, iirc, includes eruby)
- Install mod_fastcgi

My arguments for this would be:

- installing mod_fastcgi would benefit all customers, perlers,
pythoners, etc.
- updating Ruby would fix any bugs, while still retaining compatibility.
- They could be put on a list of recommended ruby-supporting
webservers, potentially getting more customers.

They are a large webhost, with a decent-sized server farm. So they
would probably be wanting to roll it out on all of them, or none of
them. Also, they use the debian packages when possible.

Any thoughts? Should I suggest mod_ruby instead? How
stable/accepted/easy to maintain is fastcgi? Pros/cons I didn't think
of? :)

Thanks, Mark