From: Thomas Fini Hansen <beast@...>
Date: 2004-05-04T16:59:52+09:00
Subject: Re: convincing a webhost to support ruby

On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 08:04:19PM +0900, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 11:19:55PM +0900, Thomas Fini Hansen wrote:
> > > >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.
> > Yeah. We're not big but I prefer debs too. And preferbly from stable,
> > but something like backports.org can be acceptable.
> 
> Check http://people.debian.org/~angdraug/

So I finally got round to trying it out, and I was plesantly surprised
that it coexist nicely with 1.6.
 
> I basically keep Woody backport of Samizdat's dependencies there, but if
> you need something else (DFSG-free), let me know.

How about eRuby? mod_ruby used to depend on that, and I'd think that
many upgrading might be using it. That's what broke for me. I tried
doing a quick backport of eruby and liberuby, but that went horribly
wrong for some reason. Apache would just hang connections using eRuby.

> On a related note, I'm sure it would be interesting for Ruby Web apps
> developers to learn about most usual restrictions that ISPs impose, so
> that we could make sure that our programs operate in less friendly
> environments.

Well, that thread kinda died, didn't it? I still want to investigate
this further, but I've been quite busy.

The thread about a Safe module looks interesting in this regard.

-- 
Thomas
beast@system-tnt.dk