[Catalyst] Catalyst Documentation

[Kieren Diment]

well, there's catinabox:

http://mfrost.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/catboxjpg.jpg

oops, I mean http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/wiki/Guides/Install/CatInABox

or if you want to do it from cpan,

http://www.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/static/cat-install

For paravirtualiasation, people who know™ recommend xen, but I use uml as it
fits my budget better.   Catalyst is very well supported under Debian by the
way.

On 01/06/06, Thomas Hartman <thomashartman1 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> "Mason seems to require custom systems in place, and iirc from when I
> looked into mason, a long time ago, also requires mod_perl, a problem
> in a shared hosting environment. "
>
> When I tried catalyst on a shared environment, it croaked in
> dependency hell. Have things improved any?
>
> I'm gearing up for doing a web site on a paravirtualized server, just
> trying to decide between uml and xen...
>
> thomas.
>
> 2006/6/1, Kieren Diment <diment at gmail.com>:
> > Apologies for the arrogance :)
> >
> > I think that the point I was making was that Mason seems to require
> custom
> > systems in place, and iirc from when I looked into mason, a long time
> ago,
> > also requires mod_perl, a problem in a shared hosting
> environment.  Perin
> > expressed this much more clearly than me, clearly because he has
> significant
> > experience with Mason, which I do not.
> >
> > Technology goes through iterations - as in the progression from
> mechanical
> > pianos, to wax cylinders to discs and so on.  Mason is an excellent
> example
> > of high quality stuff from the previous iteration of web development
> > methodology.  Because of my circumstances I wouldn't be able to be
> involved
> > in serious web development without something like catalyst to take out
> the
> > repetetive strain.
> >
> > As mentioned previously, the catalyst documentaton:
> >
> > svn co
> > http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/Catalyst/branches/Catalyst-docs
> > currently in the docs branch of the svn repos is essential reading.
> >
> > svn co
> > http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/Catalyst/branches/Catalyst-docs
> >
> > On 01/06/06, Paul Wallingford <paul at cybergestalt.net> wrote:
> > > Perrin Harkins wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 07:47 +1000, Kieren Diment wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Mason is a templating system with a few application-development
> type
> > > >> features included. Catalyst is a full blown application development
> > > >> environment.  Mason makes a serviceable Catalyst View, although I
> > > >> perfer Template Toolkit for a couple of reasons.
> > > >
> > > > I think you're exaggerating the differences here.  Although they go
> > > > about it in totally different ways, Mason and Catalyst offer very
> > > > similar functionality.  For example:
> > > >
> > > > - Flexible ways to map URIs to code.
> > > > - Uniform API for access to request data and passing parameters.
> > > > - Abstraction of runtime environment so that mod_perl, CGI, and
> FastCGI
> > > > all work the same.
> > > > - Error handling with helpful debug screens.
> > > > - Plugins for sessions and other extras.
> > > >
> > > > You could say that Mason has MORE ground to cover in the docs, since
> it
> > > > actually includes a templating system and a cache, while Catalyst
> just
> > > > provides glue code.  (The cache is provided by Cache::Cache, but is
> > > > covered nicely in the Mason docs.)
> > > >
> > > > My point is not to belittle Catalyst, but rather to say that Mason
> is a
> > > > good example of a complex Perl project with very readable docs, and
> it's
> > > > worth looking at.  The quality of documentation was one of the
> things
> > > > that set Mason apart from the very beginning, and I think it was a
> key
> > > > reason for Mason's success.  It came with guides for developers and
> > > > administrators and had a more professional feel to it than most of
> the
> > > > other tools at that time.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reply Perrin.  I am very familiar with Mason and have
> > > built a lot of stuff that does what Catalyst does.  However, I am
> > > looking for something to speed development - and a framework like
> > > Catalyst just might do the trick.  Building custom systems each time
> > > takes too long and I don't have time to build my own framework.
> > > Catalyst *seems* to fit the bill and I want to evaluate it, but the
> > > documentation seems lacking.  Maybe I am just spoiled with Mason.
> > >
> > > That said, obviously I feel that Catalyst has a lot to offer,
> otherwise
> > > I would not even consider wasting valuable time evaluating it (and
> there
> > > are a lot of other frameworks that I have discounted right off the
> bat).
> > >   This says a lot about my opinion of Catalyst.  Plus a lot of people
> > > use Catalyst and Mason together, which is encouraging.
> > >
> > > I was a bit turned off by the arrogant reply by Kieren, however.  I
> just
> > > wanted a little guidance, not some overblown sales pitch.
> > >
> > > Thanks again.
> > >
> > > Paul Wallingford
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Catalyst mailing list
> > > Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> > > http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Catalyst mailing list
> > Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> > http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalyst mailing list
> Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rawmode.org/pipermail/catalyst/attachments/20060601/78a940d8/attachment.htm