Re: "Standard" template / config modules?
- From: Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 09 Apr 2007 10:01:41 -0400
"J" == Jamie <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
J> But as far as something like, "Config::General" (for example)
J> is it considered accepted practice to just include it with the
J> script and install it as a local package?
"This software package requires Perl 5.8.5 or better and
Config::General. Please be sure they are installed and up-to-date
before continuing the installation."
Let the users and system administrators install the necessary
software; it's inappropriate to copy it yourself into a local
directory, because that way lies DLL hell, and you'll really tick off
savvy users. If you have a lot of dependencies, you can create an
installer script to automate the process; a very good model is the one
Matt S Trout put together for Catalyst.
If you simply *must* cater to the cut-rate web host crowd, you're
better off using PHP anyway, since it's likely to be (marginally)
better supported; and a user who chooses an inadequate web host over
an adequate one on the basis of saving $5 a month is not a customer
you really want anyway.
Charlton
--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- "Standard" template / config modules?
- From: Jamie
- Re: "Standard" template / config modules?
- From: Charlton Wilbur
- Re: "Standard" template / config modules?
- From: Jamie
- "Standard" template / config modules?
- Prev by Date: Re: any simple way to do this?
- Next by Date: Re: HTML::Template module in perl
- Previous by thread: Re: "Standard" template / config modules?
- Next by thread: FAQ 1.2 Who supports Perl? Who develops it? Why is it free?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|