[bbbbbbbbb]

Dancer and Mojolicious are pretty new and I will not use them in production yet (not to say that our framework is better, way from that but just that it's not open to things like that: http://blog.kraih.com/mojolicious-116-emergency-release-plea...). Catalyst is a dependency hell made true,not for us either. Mojolicious and Dancer will certainly be nice and will look into it but not at this stage of development.

>Some might say that it's a bit experimental,

Because it is.

It's nice to play with it though. But not quite yet to use for our clients.

> but the authors are awesome people, always willing to fix bugs as fast and efficiently as possible.

Won't be able to say to my client: well, you know, we've tried this experimental stuff but we met these bugs we can't do anything about.

"hey, what about FastCGI?"

This was a very good question and I would have answered go for it... Apache+FastCGI+CGI::Fast. That's quite common nowadays and I think well understood, well documented.

cpanm is not necessary, I've never used it and am happy with cpan. oh, right, cpanm is by the same author right?

perlbrew&locale::lib are nice things to have though.

> We would like to help and see how we can get it to run on DotCloud!

Apache+FastCGI+CGI::Fast,that will do for me.

Apache+mod_perl,that will do (even though i don't use it).

Having at the cutting edge technologies is nice, don't get me wrong but it would help to have at least a more stable or at least bullet-proof environment too.

[mst]

If you have a problem with Catalyst dependencies, please report them to irc.perl.org #catalyst (I'm mst on there).

Any time anybody reports a problem with them, we go out of our way to solve it - avoiding wheel reinvention is important to us to speed development but we understand that using a module makes us responsible for it installing for end users.

if you really want CGI.pm, there are Plack modules to convert a PSGI environment to a CGI environment - descended roughly from the Catalyst::Controller::WrapCGI that Opsview sponsored Shadowcat to write years ago.

And remember, PSGI might appear to be new but much of the guts of Plack are pulled from previous framework-specific code so the various workarounds for server insanities are already there. It's a lot more reliable than you appear to think.

[bbbbbbbbb]

>PSGI might appear to be new but much of the guts of Plack are pulled from previous framework-specific code so the various workarounds for server insanities are already there. It's a lot more reliable than you appear to think.

I see. Perhaps my vision of the state of PSGI is not right indeed. Nethertheless, my apps run under Fast::CGI and I really don't see the advantage of PSGI.

[whiskeyjack]

I resepectfully disagree. My company has two PSGI Dancer apps running mission critical elements. They're "new" but they're absolutely production ready. Plack/PSGI has been embraced by almost everyone.

I'm REALLY looking forward to playing with DotCloud.

Plack/PSGI is not "cutting edge". It's the way to do it now, not tomorrow. You do Miyagawa a disservice implying he's pumping his own code.

[nmcfarl]

Likewise my company is 100% PSGI for the last year+, we're a mix of a good number of Catalyst and Dancer apps. We've had absolutely 0 problems here.

PSGI stable, sane and the way you want to be doing things.

[bbbbbbbbb]

As both of you have a good experience of Plack/PSGI, could you sum up the benefit you got from using it?

[askbjoernhansen]

If your app (or your framework) runs on Plack/PSGI you have a wide choice of server implementations. It will work under mod_perl, FastCGI and numerous other server environments.

Indeed if you write an app to run on DotCloud; you can also run the same app on your laptop, Phenona, any other server -- etc etc.

As someone else said (more politely), you'd have to be nuts to do an HTTP app now and not take advantage of it.

[bbbbbbbbb]

>Plack/PSGI has been embraced by almost everyone.

In your company or in general? Because if it's in general, I would be more than happy to see where you get your stats.

> You do Miyagawa a disservice implying he's pumping his own code.

Well, I do think that a not even 2yo spec,a set of modules that are 6~18 months old pushed on a cloud service like that with no back up plan for more "traditional" systems is a way to push its own system. we can agree to disagree on that. which percentage of providers offer plack with nginx nowadays compared to Apache with FactCGI?