Mojo::Server::FastCGI is up for adoption!

32 views
Skip to first unread message

Sebastian Riedel

unread,
Sep 11, 2011, 2:34:35 PM9/11/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
You may already be aware that we have rather high quality standards in Mojolicious when it comes to unit tests, sadly Mojo::Server::FastCGI does not currently live up to those and is facing removal from the core distribution.

From what i personally gathered during the last few months, FastCGI is losing popularity rather quickly, and the few remaining users might be just as happy using the PSGI/Plack binding.

So we are now looking for someone willing to maintain it as a separate CPAN distribution, should there be any interest in keeping the module alive.

sri

unread,
Sep 11, 2011, 3:05:15 PM9/11/11
to Mojolicious
And here is the commit that removed it from core, so you can see what
exactly needs to be maintained.

https://github.com/kraih/mojo/commit/a1a16bb1ccdadb84d2b4942ff79db15a7db17260

--
sebastian

Tobias Oetiker

unread,
Sep 11, 2011, 3:13:28 PM9/11/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
Hi Sebastian,

Today Sebastian Riedel wrote:

> You may already be aware that we have rather high quality
> standards in Mojolicious when it comes to unit tests, sadly
> Mojo::Server::FastCGI does not currently live up to those and is
> facing removal from the core distribution.
>
> From what i personally gathered during the last few months,
> FastCGI is losing popularity rather quickly, and the few
> remaining users might be just as happy using the PSGI/Plack
> binding.

Over the past few months, we have been moving all our major
customer projects to using Mojolicious, deploying all of them with
mod_fcgid and mod_suexec on apache ... it has been working
wonderfully ... I would be very sad to see this ability getting
removed from stock Mojolicious ...

For stability and security reasons mod_perl (same as mod_php) is
not an option for us, so without fastcgi we would have to move to
using mod_proxy which is doable but seems more cumbersum than
fastcgi in its requirement to startup a separate server
explicititly ...

Could the lack of FastCGI 'noise' on the ML also come from the fact
that since the introduction of mod_fcgid this combo just works very
well and gives little to discuss?

cheers
tobi

--
Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland
http://it.oetiker.ch to...@oetiker.ch ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900

Sebastian Riedel

unread,
Sep 11, 2011, 3:23:45 PM9/11/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
Over the past few months, we have been moving all our major
customer projects to using Mojolicious, deploying all of them with
mod_fcgid and mod_suexec on apache ... it has been working
wonderfully ... I would be very sad to see this ability getting
removed from stock Mojolicious ...

Could the lack of FastCGI 'noise' on the ML also come from the fact
that since the introduction of mod_fcgid this combo just works very
well and gives little to discuss?

Yes, the binding works quite well at the moment, but doesn't have good enough unit tests for us to guarantee that it stays that way, which is simply not acceptable for core functionality.

I only see two options, the unit tests get seriously improved (extremely hard and therefore unlikely to happen), or we maintain it as a separate distribution that doesn't have to follow our coding guidelines.

Are you maybe interested in adopting it?

sri

unread,
Sep 12, 2011, 11:26:20 AM9/12/11
to Mojolicious
Looks like we now have our volunteer for maintaining it as a separate
CPAN distribution.
If there is anyone interested in taking care of the other alternative
solution (improving tests), now would be the time to come forward.

--
sebastian

Anton Ukolov

unread,
Sep 12, 2011, 11:28:45 AM9/12/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
what's the address of address of repository?
And name in CPAN?

2011/9/12 sri <kra...@googlemail.com>:

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mojolicious" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mojol...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mojolicious...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mojolicious?hl=en.
>
>

Sebastian Riedel

unread,
Sep 12, 2011, 11:30:40 AM9/12/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
what's the address of address of repository?
And name in CPAN?

Repository does not exist yet, but i expect the name to be Mojo::Server::FastCGI.

Akron

unread,
Sep 13, 2011, 10:40:29 AM9/13/11
to Mojolicious
Is there no chance for a return into the core after the separation -
if tests are working?

Sebastian Riedel

unread,
Sep 13, 2011, 10:45:52 AM9/13/11
to mojol...@googlegroups.com
Is there no chance for a return into the core after the separation -
if tests are working?

Sure, but writing proper tests for it is really hard, doubt anyone would be willing to invest the necessary amount of time.

sri

unread,
Sep 13, 2011, 2:58:17 PM9/13/11
to Mojolicious
It appears the first volunteer has vanished again, so the module is
back up for adoption.

--
sebastian
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages