[rt-users] mod_perl2 compatibility

[Rainer Duffner]

Phil Homewood wrote:

>
>
> Chris Meyer wrote:
>
>> Can someone clarify the current state of mod_perl2 + Apache 2.x  
>> compatibility for RT 3.4?
>>
>> It would be nice if this information was stated unambiguously in the  
>> installation guides.
>
>
> What's ambiguous about it as it stands?
>
>> Right now here is the information in the installation guide (search  
>> this page for 'BIG WARNING'):
>>
>> http://wiki.bestpractical.com/index.cgi?ManualInstallation
>
>
> That says the same thing that README tells you -- mod_perl2 is not 
> recommended. Or at least that's how I read it. If someone thinks it's 
> unclear and can provide better wording, please have a go...
>


The problem is (IMO) on layer 8 (user).
People (probably, sometimes) think:
"What? MP2 not 'supported'? WTF, MP1 is soo old and only for wimps - who 
uses a version-1 when a version-2 is available? I'll try anyway and have 
the mailinglist-people help me fix it."
At least, that's what I thought (minus the thing about pestering the ML 
- I usually know when it's my fault).
Until very recently, it seemed to work pretty well. "Recentyl" being 
pre-3.4.2 ...
Similar things could probably said about people struggling with various 
PERL-odities of their Linux-distributions, though the recommendations 
(or warnings) are even less explicit.
But the things is: there's really no "bullet-proof" way to install RT.
While I never have problems installing it on FreeBSD (I'm quite often 
tempted to suggest learning FreeBSD instead of wrestling for hours with 
whatever the poor soul is trying to use at that moment), someone with 
less insight might just completely hose his system. The same goes for 
_insert_your_fine_distro_here .

That said, an entry like...:
"Q: Will MP2 work for me?"
"A: If you have to ask, it's probably not"

...might push those uncertain users over the line to MP1 ;-)


Perhaps the wording is so vague as not to discriminate anybody?




cheers,
Rainer