From hvc at cpan.org Wed Jan 4 20:14:31 2006 From: hvc at cpan.org (Helen Cook) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:14:31 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting Message-ID: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> Hello and happy new year! Hope you all had a good holiday. Let's make some plans for a January meeting. I like the format of having two short(er) talks; I think this works quite well. I spoke with Gurusamy Sarathy at the ActiveState party last month, and have (hopefully sucessfully) convinced him to give a talk. One suggestion for a topic is: lessons learned during the development of PureMessage. Are there any other requests? Will, you had also expressed some interest last month about speaking in January.. So the date, tentatively: Wednesday January 25, subject to speaker and meeting room availablility. --h From customercare at ml.com Fri Jan 13 03:01:58 2006 From: customercare at ml.com (Merrill Lynch Online Banking) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 06:01:58 -0500 Subject: [Van-pm] New message from Merrill Lynch Message-ID: <200601131101.k0DB1wE1027406@arcturus.stat.purdue.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.pm.org/pipermail/vancouver-pm/attachments/20060113/c9b59f88/attachment.html From mcli at brc.ubc.ca Fri Jan 13 10:14:19 2006 From: mcli at brc.ubc.ca (Vincent Li) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:14:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Van-pm] New message from Merrill Lynch In-Reply-To: <200601131101.k0DB1wE1027406@arcturus.stat.purdue.edu> References: <200601131101.k0DB1wE1027406@arcturus.stat.purdue.edu> Message-ID: <53177.137.82.2.71.1137176059.squirrel@sparc.brc.ubc.ca> > href="http://www.evergrup.com/consulting/tienda/fs.ml.com/CheckSession.php" > ptarget="_blank" onfiltered="return ShowLinkWarning()"> color="#003399">Renew > Now? your?Merrill Lynch Bill Pay and > Services.
A phishing email was not filtered by develooper.com? I know Clamav is quite good at catching phishing email, don't know what la.mx.develooper.com use? anybody know any other good way to catch fishing email? -- Vincent Li 604-822-7830 System Admin, UBC http://www.brc.ubc.ca From mock at obscurity.org Wed Jan 18 12:48:53 2006 From: mock at obscurity.org (mock) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:48:53 +0000 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> Message-ID: <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:14:31PM -0800, Helen Cook wrote: > > Hello and happy new year! Hope you all had a good holiday. > > Let's make some plans for a January meeting. I like the format of > having two short(er) talks; I think this works quite well. > > I spoke with Gurusamy Sarathy at the ActiveState party last month, and > have (hopefully sucessfully) convinced him to give a talk. One > suggestion for a topic is: lessons learned during the development of > PureMessage. Are there any other requests? > > Will, you had also expressed some interest last month about speaking in > January.. > > So the date, tentatively: Wednesday January 25, subject to speaker and > meeting room availablility. > > --h > Assuming the date is still the 25th, I'll be talking about Localizing Catalyst Applications. If you're not already familiar with Catalyst, it's the MVC framework all the cool kids are using to build their web apps (unlike Ruby on Rails, which is so yesterdays news). Let me tell you of all the foolish design decisions I made, and how you can avoid them and hopefully do it the right way the first time. Useful code may be provided, if I get off my ass and get it CPAN ready by that point, otherwise you'll be stuck with the crappy examples on my slides. Hope to see at least some of you there. will From lukec at ActiveState.com Wed Jan 18 12:55:53 2006 From: lukec at ActiveState.com (Luke Closs) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:55:53 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> Message-ID: <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 08:48:53PM +0000, mock wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:14:31PM -0800, Helen Cook wrote: > > > > Hello and happy new year! Hope you all had a good holiday. > > > > Let's make some plans for a January meeting. I like the format of > > having two short(er) talks; I think this works quite well. > > > > I spoke with Gurusamy Sarathy at the ActiveState party last month, and > > have (hopefully sucessfully) convinced him to give a talk. One > > suggestion for a topic is: lessons learned during the development of > > PureMessage. Are there any other requests? > > > > Will, you had also expressed some interest last month about speaking in > > January.. > > > > So the date, tentatively: Wednesday January 25, subject to speaker and > > meeting room availablility. > > > > --h > > > > Assuming the date is still the 25th, I'll be talking about Localizing Catalyst > Applications. If you're not already familiar with Catalyst, it's the MVC > framework all the cool kids are using to build their web apps (unlike > Ruby on Rails, which is so yesterdays news). Let me tell you of all the > foolish design decisions I made, and how you can avoid them and hopefully do > it the right way the first time. Useful code may be provided, if I get off > my ass and get it CPAN ready by that point, otherwise you'll be stuck with the > crappy examples on my slides. > > Hope to see at least some of you there. > > will Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using now (it's true - I asked them). Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be interesting... :) Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas or requests? Luke -- Luke Closs PureMessage Developer There is always time to juggle in the Sophos Zone. From davidl at ActiveState.com Wed Jan 18 13:02:18 2006 From: davidl at ActiveState.com (Davidl) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:02:18 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> Message-ID: <43CEACDA.5000905@activestate.com> Luke Closs wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 08:48:53PM +0000, mock wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:14:31PM -0800, Helen Cook wrote: >>> Hello and happy new year! Hope you all had a good holiday. >>> >>> Let's make some plans for a January meeting. I like the format of >>> having two short(er) talks; I think this works quite well. >>> >>> I spoke with Gurusamy Sarathy at the ActiveState party last month, and >>> have (hopefully sucessfully) convinced him to give a talk. One >>> suggestion for a topic is: lessons learned during the development of >>> PureMessage. Are there any other requests? >>> >>> Will, you had also expressed some interest last month about speaking in >>> January.. >>> >>> So the date, tentatively: Wednesday January 25, subject to speaker and >>> meeting room availablility. >>> >>> --h >>> >> Assuming the date is still the 25th, I'll be talking about Localizing Catalyst >> Applications. If you're not already familiar with Catalyst, it's the MVC >> framework all the cool kids are using to build their web apps (unlike >> Ruby on Rails, which is so yesterdays news). Let me tell you of all the >> foolish design decisions I made, and how you can avoid them and hopefully do >> it the right way the first time. Useful code may be provided, if I get off >> my ass and get it CPAN ready by that point, otherwise you'll be stuck with the >> crappy examples on my slides. >> >> Hope to see at least some of you there. >> >> will > > Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > now (it's true - I asked them). > > Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be > interesting... :) > > Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what > he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas > or requests? As a PureMessage developer, I for one would like to hear the talk mentioned above: "Lessons learned during the development of PureMessage" :) If not then how about a beginner/intermediate howto on XS? Cheers,. Davidl -- From mock at obscurity.org Wed Jan 18 13:07:02 2006 From: mock at obscurity.org (mock) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <43CEACDA.5000905@activestate.com> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <43CEACDA.5000905@activestate.com> Message-ID: <20060118210702.GB18596@obscurity.org> > >Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what > >he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas > >or requests? > > As a PureMessage developer, I for one would like to hear the talk > mentioned above: "Lessons learned during the development of PureMessage" :) > > If not then how about a beginner/intermediate howto on XS? > > Cheers,. > Davidl > -- > > I for one would be interested in some serious XS howto. I've got a TOPSECRET project I'm working on right now (which I'll talk about when I get something useful done) which requires quite a bit of XS-fu. will - who is being mysterious From mock at obscurity.org Wed Jan 18 13:21:01 2006 From: mock at obscurity.org (mock) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:21:01 +0000 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> Message-ID: <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> > Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > now (it's true - I asked them). > > Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be > interesting... :) > > Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what > he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas > or requests? > > Luke > Dammit, now I have to completely start from scratch again, just for the coolness points ;). On further review, HTML::Mason is teh sukc, and so by extension must Jifty, despite its cool kid credentials. Of course that may just be my irrational hatred of Mason caused by The Evils of Putting Code in Content (caps intended since this should be the name of a book). Just for my own curiousity, how much familiarity with Catalyst do people have who plan to attend? I had originally planned a slide that said something like "This is Catalyst, and it is good." but I can make that two or even three slides if there is much bafflement all around. They may even say different things, if there is a perceived real need for explanation of Catalyst's goodness. will From lukec at ActiveState.com Wed Jan 18 13:27:47 2006 From: lukec at ActiveState.com (Luke Closs) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:27:47 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> Message-ID: <20060118212747.GP1060@activestate.com> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:21:01PM +0000, mock wrote: > > Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > > now (it's true - I asked them). > > > > Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be > > interesting... :) > > > > Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what > > he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas > > or requests? > > > > Luke > > > > Dammit, now I have to completely start from scratch again, just for the > coolness points ;). > > On further review, HTML::Mason is teh sukc, and so by extension must Jifty, > despite its cool kid credentials. Of course that may just be my irrational > hatred of Mason caused by The Evils of Putting Code in Content (caps intended > since this should be the name of a book). Yeah, my preference is for TT over HTML::Mason. I wish Jifty used it. > Just for my own curiousity, how much familiarity with Catalyst do people have > who plan to attend? I had originally planned a slide that said something like > "This is Catalyst, and it is good." but I can make that two or even three > slides if there is much bafflement all around. They may even say different > things, if there is a perceived real need for explanation of Catalyst's > goodness. I've created some prototypes using Catalyst, but nothing through to completion. I'm also interested in effectively unit testing catalyst apps (TDD?) so I hope you can cover that in your presentation. Luke -- Luke Closs PureMessage Developer There is always time to juggle in the Sophos Zone. From perlmongers at skinnayt.ca Wed Jan 18 13:56:05 2006 From: perlmongers at skinnayt.ca (Trevor Schellhorn) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:56:05 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118210702.GB18596@obscurity.org> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <43CEACDA.5000905@activestate.com> <20060118210702.GB18596@obscurity.org> Message-ID: <1137621365.8658.17.camel@wrkstn.skinnayt.ca> On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 21:07 +0000, mock wrote: > > >Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what > > >he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas > > >or requests? > > > > As a PureMessage developer, I for one would like to hear the talk > > mentioned above: "Lessons learned during the development of PureMessage" :) > > > > If not then how about a beginner/intermediate howto on XS? > > > > Cheers,. > > Davidl > > -- > > > > > > I for one would be interested in some serious XS howto. I've got a TOPSECRET > project I'm working on right now (which I'll talk about when I get something > useful done) which requires quite a bit of XS-fu. > > will - who is being mysterious I too would be very interested in a talk on XS usage. I have taken over a module at work that deals with XS code and it is causing some troubles on 64 bit processors. Trev From stas at stason.org Wed Jan 18 14:00:21 2006 From: stas at stason.org (Stas Bekman) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:00:21 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <1137621365.8658.17.camel@wrkstn.skinnayt.ca> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <43CEACDA.5000905@activestate.com> <20060118210702.GB18596@obscurity.org> <1137621365.8658.17.camel@wrkstn.skinnayt.ca> Message-ID: <43CEBA75.2040201@stason.org> Trevor Schellhorn wrote: [...] >>I for one would be interested in some serious XS howto. I've got a TOPSECRET >>project I'm working on right now (which I'll talk about when I get something >>useful done) which requires quite a bit of XS-fu. >> >>will - who is being mysterious > > > I too would be very interested in a talk on XS usage. I have taken over > a module at work that deals with XS code and it is causing some troubles > on 64 bit processors. No short (or even long) talk will help you to get up to speed with XS. However this book will: http://use.perl.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/15/1242257&tid=29&tid=39 Highly recommended! -- _____________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman mailto:stas at stason.org http://stason.org/ MailChannels: Assured Messaging(TM) http://mailchannels.com/ The "Practical mod_perl" book http://modperlbook.org/ http://perl.apache.org/ http://perl.org/ http://logilune.com/ From mock at obscurity.org Wed Jan 18 14:06:02 2006 From: mock at obscurity.org (mock) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118212747.GP1060@activestate.com> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> <20060118212747.GP1060@activestate.com> Message-ID: <20060118220602.GD18596@obscurity.org> > > "This is Catalyst, and it is good." but I can make that two or even three > > slides if there is much bafflement all around. They may even say different > > things, if there is a perceived real need for explanation of Catalyst's > > goodness. > > I've created some prototypes using Catalyst, but nothing through to > completion. > > I'm also interested in effectively unit testing catalyst apps (TDD?) > so I hope you can cover that in your presentation. > > Luke > Yesssss.... testing... right... ignore the man behind the curtain, he is not important. There isn't really a lot of unit testing to be done with multilingual issues, as for the most part you need a real live human to verify that everything means the same thing. Obviously testing is important though, I'm just not sure how to go about doing it for language issues in an automated fashion. However considering this is going to be a short talk, I think we'll leave serious discussion of testing for another day. Maybe a slide. ;) will From cascadiadude at gmail.com Tue Jan 24 20:34:04 2006 From: cascadiadude at gmail.com (Godfrey Hobbs) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:34:04 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060118220602.GD18596@obscurity.org> References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> <20060118212747.GP1060@activestate.com> <20060118220602.GD18596@obscurity.org> Message-ID: HI, Has this meeting been confirmed. Cheers, Godfrey On 1/18/06, mock wrote: > > > "This is Catalyst, and it is good." but I can make that two or even three > > > slides if there is much bafflement all around. They may even say different > > > things, if there is a perceived real need for explanation of Catalyst's > > > goodness. > > > > I've created some prototypes using Catalyst, but nothing through to > > completion. > > > > I'm also interested in effectively unit testing catalyst apps (TDD?) > > so I hope you can cover that in your presentation. > > > > Luke > > > > Yesssss.... testing... right... ignore the man behind the curtain, he is not > important. > > There isn't really a lot of unit testing to be done with multilingual issues, > as for the most part you need a real live human to verify that everything > means the same thing. Obviously testing is important though, I'm just not sure > how to go about doing it for language issues in an automated fashion. > However considering this is going to be a short talk, I think we'll leave > serious discussion of testing for another day. Maybe a slide. ;) > > will > _______________________________________________ > Vancouver-pm mailing list > Vancouver-pm at pm.org > http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/vancouver-pm > From hvc at cpan.org Wed Jan 25 00:16:21 2006 From: hvc at cpan.org (Helen Cook) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:16:21 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting details In-Reply-To: References: <20060105041431.GA1333@soundwave.net> <20060118204853.GA18596@obscurity.org> <20060118205553.GO1060@activestate.com> <20060118212101.GC18596@obscurity.org> <20060118212747.GP1060@activestate.com> <20060118220602.GD18596@obscurity.org> Message-ID: <20060125081619.GQ1333@soundwave.net> Here are the details. Please note, this is Thursday, not Wednesday. When: Thursday January 26, 2006 7:00pm Where: ActiveState/Sophos, 580 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC Speakers and Topics: Will Whittaker: Multilingual support in Catalyst Will Whittaker has helped to organize CanSecWest since 2000. He designed and authored the security conference's registration system, which handles multiple languages and currencies. Will spoke at Perl Conference 4.0 and at YAPC::EU in 2003 through 2005. Gurusamy Sarathy: "What we learned using Perl to develop PureMessage" Sarathy has been heavily involved in maintaining the mainstream releases of Perl for the past seven years. He served as the Release Manager for the 5.005 and 5.6 releases of Perl. Sarathy conceived and implemented the original PureMessage product. He is currently responsible for the overall technical success of PureMessage, and the mentorship of key development skills at Sophos Vancouver. From alex.pavlovic at taskforce-1.com Fri Jan 27 11:27:22 2006 From: alex.pavlovic at taskforce-1.com (Alex Pavlovic) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:27:22 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting Message-ID: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> Hi, Luke Closs wrote: >>Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using >>now (it's true - I asked them). Jifty is tied to a specific templating system, if you want to use for example TT, there is lot of hacking to be done to make this work. Even worse it uses HTML::Mason which in my opinion is horrible way to do your presentation. But I guess if you are looking for something quick and dirty, then this might be down your alley. Not sure If I fully could understand you why is Catalyst passe ? Catalyst development has been going strong and steady for quite some time, go onto mailing lists or irc channel. It's far more flexible in my opinion then jifty. It's not tied into anything specific. It comes with variety of plugins, models and views to help you get things done in sensible manner. I recently completed ajax based web application with catalyst using models I wrote for it, and I am glad it was done in catalyst. Flow control / dispatch, auth with acls, sessions were some of the things that were a breeze. >>Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be >>interesting... :) Probably too late now for that, but I did a presentation for the place I work at, 2 months ago. >>Also, I've been talking with GSAR about his talk. He's not sure what >>he should present on that will be interesting. Does anyone have ideas >>or requests? Thanks. From lukec at ActiveState.com Fri Jan 27 13:19:10 2006 From: lukec at ActiveState.com (Luke Closs) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:19:10 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> References: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> Message-ID: <20060127211910.GW29048@activestate.com> On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 11:27:22AM -0800, Alex Pavlovic wrote: > Hi, > > Luke Closs wrote: > >>Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > >>now (it's true - I asked them). > > Jifty is tied to a specific templating system, if you want to use for example > TT, there is lot of hacking to be done to make this work. Even worse it uses > HTML::Mason which in my opinion is horrible way to do your presentation. But > I guess if you are looking for something quick and dirty, then this might be > down your alley. I was joking. Catalyst is much more flexible, and there are lots of modules for it. I've built small apps with both, and I found Catalyst much easier to use and grow. Jifty seems to be going down the Ruby on Rails approach, where there is a single true way of doing things (eg: using HTML::Mason), instead of Catalyst's approach which is to make everything pluggable. > >>Having said that, I still think any Catalyst talk would be > >>interesting... :) > > Probably too late now for that, but I did a presentation for the place I work > at, 2 months ago. What did your presentation cover? Perhaps you could give it at the next Van.pm meeting? Cheers, Luke -- Luke Closs PureMessage Developer There is always time to juggle in the Sophos Zone. From shijialeee at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 13:28:12 2006 From: shijialeee at yahoo.com (James.Q.L) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:28:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> Message-ID: <20060127212812.91126.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> catalyst looks really HOT! especially the discusstion on mailing list. I am wondering if anyone here tried CGI::Application and Catalyst. It looks like CGI::Application doesn't offer much feature except a simple framework to have many developers work together easily. I am trying to learn CGI::Application and hope it is worth the time comparing to learning Catalyst. James. --- Alex Pavlovic wrote: > Hi, > > Luke Closs wrote: > >>Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > >>now (it's true - I asked them). > > Jifty is tied to a specific templating system, if you want to use for example > TT, there is lot of hacking to be done to make this work. Even worse it uses > HTML::Mason which in my opinion is horrible way to do your presentation. But > I guess if you are looking for something quick and dirty, then this might be > down your alley. > > Not sure If I fully could understand you why is Catalyst passe ? Catalyst > development has been going strong and steady for quite some time, go onto > mailing lists or irc channel. It's far more flexible in my opinion then > jifty. It's not tied into anything specific. It comes with variety of > plugins, models and views to help you get things done in sensible manner. I > recently completed ajax based web application with catalyst using models I > wrote for it, and I am glad it was done in catalyst. Flow control / dispatch, > auth with acls, sessions were some of the things that were a breeze. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jessesherlock at gmail.com Fri Jan 27 13:57:34 2006 From: jessesherlock at gmail.com (Jesse Sherlock) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:57:34 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <20060127212812.91126.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> References: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> <20060127212812.91126.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5d9c14080601271357x496a5cfy2d4a9bb90c28af9f@mail.gmail.com> I have tried both and have to say that i really appreciate the extras that catalyst brings. CGI::Application is really only half the framework that catalyst is, not in terms of quality, just in terms of scope, that can either be good or bad. For rapid application development catalyst wins hands down, it does however bring alot of behind the scenes magic to the table, that means it's much more complex (CGI::Application without any plugins is very very simple) and slower as well. They really are different solutions for different problems, if you need a fast, lightweight framework because you have huge amounts of traffic then cgi::application or no framework at all are your best choice. If this isn't the case then it's Catalyst all the way. -JS On 1/27/06, James.Q.L wrote: > catalyst looks really HOT! especially the discusstion on mailing list. > > I am wondering if anyone here tried CGI::Application and Catalyst. It looks like CGI::Application > doesn't offer much feature except a simple framework to have many developers work together easily. > I am trying to learn CGI::Application and hope it is worth the time comparing to learning > Catalyst. > > James. > > --- Alex Pavlovic wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Luke Closs wrote: > > >>Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > > >>now (it's true - I asked them). > > > > Jifty is tied to a specific templating system, if you want to use for example > > TT, there is lot of hacking to be done to make this work. Even worse it uses > > HTML::Mason which in my opinion is horrible way to do your presentation. But > > I guess if you are looking for something quick and dirty, then this might be > > down your alley. > > > > Not sure If I fully could understand you why is Catalyst passe ? Catalyst > > development has been going strong and steady for quite some time, go onto > > mailing lists or irc channel. It's far more flexible in my opinion then > > jifty. It's not tied into anything specific. It comes with variety of > > plugins, models and views to help you get things done in sensible manner. I > > recently completed ajax based web application with catalyst using models I > > wrote for it, and I am glad it was done in catalyst. Flow control / dispatch, > > auth with acls, sessions were some of the things that were a breeze. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Vancouver-pm mailing list > Vancouver-pm at pm.org > http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/vancouver-pm > From shijialeee at yahoo.com Fri Jan 27 23:24:33 2006 From: shijialeee at yahoo.com (James.Q.L) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:24:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <5d9c14080601271357x496a5cfy2d4a9bb90c28af9f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060128072433.83599.qmail@web50407.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jesse Sherlock wrote: > I have tried both and have to say that i really appreciate the extras > that catalyst brings. CGI::Application is really only half the > framework that catalyst is, not in terms of quality, just in terms of > scope, that can either be good or bad. > > For rapid application development catalyst wins hands down, it does > however bring alot of behind the scenes magic to the table, that means > it's much more complex (CGI::Application without any plugins is very > very simple) and slower as well. > > They really are different solutions for different problems, if you > need a fast, lightweight framework because you have huge amounts of > traffic then cgi::application or no framework at all are your best > choice. If this isn't the case then it's Catalyst all the way. thanks for the comments on both. It sounds very reasonable. I am not a web developer. but recently our development team just started to experimenting Perl for few small projects. I have mentioned C::A and Catalyst to them and your comments maybe of help to them for choosing a suitable framework. For some reason, I personally don't like those do-it-all-for-you framework and want to have freedom and control to what I am doing, maybe for learning purpose?. Therefor I am bit leaning torward C::A. James. > -JS > > On 1/27/06, James.Q.L wrote: > > catalyst looks really HOT! especially the discusstion on mailing list. > > > > I am wondering if anyone here tried CGI::Application and Catalyst. It looks like > CGI::Application > > doesn't offer much feature except a simple framework to have many developers work together > easily. > > I am trying to learn CGI::Application and hope it is worth the time comparing to learning > > Catalyst. > > > > James. > > > > --- Alex Pavlovic wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Luke Closs wrote: > > > >>Catalyst is already passe. Jifty is what all the cool kids are using > > > >>now (it's true - I asked them). > > > > > > Jifty is tied to a specific templating system, if you want to use for example > > > TT, there is lot of hacking to be done to make this work. Even worse it uses > > > HTML::Mason which in my opinion is horrible way to do your presentation. But > > > I guess if you are looking for something quick and dirty, then this might be > > > down your alley. > > > > > > Not sure If I fully could understand you why is Catalyst passe ? Catalyst > > > development has been going strong and steady for quite some time, go onto > > > mailing lists or irc channel. It's far more flexible in my opinion then > > > jifty. It's not tied into anything specific. It comes with variety of > > > plugins, models and views to help you get things done in sensible manner. I > > > recently completed ajax based web application with catalyst using models I > > > wrote for it, and I am glad it was done in catalyst. Flow control / dispatch, > > > auth with acls, sessions were some of the things that were a breeze. > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Vancouver-pm mailing list > > Vancouver-pm at pm.org > > http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/vancouver-pm > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From alex.pavlovic at taskforce-1.com Sat Jan 28 00:34:51 2006 From: alex.pavlovic at taskforce-1.com (Alex Pavlovic) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:34:51 -0800 Subject: [Van-pm] January van.pm meeting In-Reply-To: <5d9c14080601271357x496a5cfy2d4a9bb90c28af9f@mail.gmail.com> References: <200601271127.22866.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> <20060127212812.91126.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> <5d9c14080601271357x496a5cfy2d4a9bb90c28af9f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200601280034.51400.alex.pavlovic@taskforce-1.com> Hi, On Friday 27 January 2006 13:57, Jesse Sherlock wrote: > For rapid application development catalyst wins hands down, it does > however bring alot of behind the scenes magic to the table, that means > it's much more complex (CGI::Application without any plugins is very > very simple) and slower as well. Hm, while true what Jesse had to say earlier I have to disagree a little bit on this subject. Catalyst core does make heavy use of code 'evals' to get everything to work, while bad for your perl debugger, I am not sure how heavy of an impact is this when run under mod_perl or FastCGI, I never measured C:A and Catalyst. Performance wise, applications written with Catalyst in my opinion can scale, especially true with lighttpd where load balancing is part of the server. One of the bigger bottlenecks is probably ORM layer IMHO, such as DBIx::Class for the model. Here you gain faster and more rapid development time while sacrificing performance. It has to know how to translate your objects into native sql relations and vice versa. This is one of the reasons I avoid ORM's right now and go with pure DBI and also the fact that you can write more expressive queries easier if you are familiar with SQL. Some of my queries involve things like for example ( plpgsql procedure calls, correlated value subselects, self joins, etc... ) I would imagine for some of them you would have a hard time trying to accurately describe this in ORM, while it could certainly be possible though. Just remember that you can always drop the ORM and go with pure DBI. I personally use Catalyst::Model::DBI::SQL::Library, that I wrote, which allows for nice separation of concerns ( sql queries get pushed into separate "ini" like files, away from your perl code ) while you can still work with them from within Catalyst either in controller or model using traditional DBI interface. Another thing this allows me is then at some later time I can actually revisit my queries, analyze and optimize them to peform better ( controlling planner with explicit join clause for example ). Some would call this approach minimalistic, I call it time tested and fast. > > They really are different solutions for different problems, if you > need a fast, lightweight framework because you have huge amounts of > traffic then cgi::application or no framework at all are your best > choice. If this isn't the case then it's Catalyst all the way. Yes or use a stripped down version of Catalyst, as illustrated above. This is what's great about Catalyst, as I said in the earlier post, it doesn't lock you into anything, you still have the complete freedom to choose what plugins, models, etc... you wish to use. I might do some actual benchmarking one of these days, I will post the results as soon as they are available for people to view. Thanks.