mod_python vs mod_snake

[Allan M. Wind]

On 2001-12-12 14:44:25, Kragen Sitaker wrote:
> allanwind at mediaone.net (Allan M. Wind) writes:
> > I like mod_snake more (in part because it claims support for Apache
> > 2.x), but you might find that there are more people using mod_python
> > (e.g. more community knowledge / support).  PyApache would also satisfy
> > your need from how you describe your need and seem to most mature.
> 
> It sounds like you've tried all three.  Is that correct, and what was
> your experience like?

Yes, I have tried all 3.

It is really subjective, but I disliked mod_python and instead used
mod_snake for which I have written an authentication module and CGIs
against (it is lot easier in python against mod_snake than C).  I like
the fact that mod_snake runs standard CGIs (just realize that
instantiation of default values in function calls works different than
expected with a persistent CGI).  That said, mod_snake has bugs ;-)

PyApache is not very well documented and the text file that is there
seems out of date, it's persistency mechanism relies on a special
variable name.  PyApache does have a really nice feature of being able
to run with only the compiled code for your CGIs (e.g. don't
need to have your source laying around).

I might end up writing my own, "thinner" than mod_snake.


/Allan
-- 
Allan M. Wind			email: allanwind at mediaone.net
P.O. Box 2022			finger: awind at digit-safe.dyndns.org (GPG/PGP)
Woburn, MA 01888-0022
USA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20011212/a4e583de/attachment.sig>