Re: [Slashcode-general] Can I run slashcode via cgi-bin of an ISP?

[Morbus I. <mo...@di...>]

As people have already said, the answer is "no".

And this bugs me. I've chatted with Chris Nandor about this vaguely, and he 
said I should approach the list with my concerns. After lurking for a week 
or so, gosh golly, what a perfect way to broach my concerns.

Slashcode, while great code, is for geeks.
Slashcode, while great code, needs to be for everyone.

"Everyone" in this case means:

   - a stupid user who barely understands FTP and
     permissions. they need to be able to unwinzip,
     upload, and chmod through FTP easily.

   - the ISP. one response was, in essence, "does
     your ISP love you? cos if he don't, you can
     just hide in the closet, fanboy."

This is a problem.

Originally, when I contacted Chris, I had asked him about doing a 
Slashcode-Lite type of port, called Slashcod (an in-joke from LILO). My 
desires were:

   a) no module installation.
   b) optional database support (which he tells me is possible, but
      one would need to write a DBD::CSV implementation, which
      probably violates a)
   c) xml support (which after talking with him is nothing more
      than a DBD type of port, so shouldn't be a big deal).
   d) no apache recompile.

The big, big, big one is a). That's no template-toolkit, none of the dozens 
of other required modules. A lot of code would have to rewritten, I 
believe, just to support the stupid user. Some people don't believe that 
stupid users should have access to this power. I disagree.

I never did understand why d) was needed. I'm the sysadmin at a small ISP - 
I still get remotely nervous of hosing 200 sites just because I, 
personally, want to run Slashcode.

So, that's my soapbox derby. Thoughts?

Morbus Iff
.sig on other machine.
http://www.disobey.com/
http://www.gamegrene.com/