Yeah, if we generalized our mailing list advice now, it (correct me if I'm wrong) seems to imply "start out with webrick and learn how it works, if you can, upgrade to Passenger, and if you can't, use Mongrel?).
This is imho a good advice.
(Also ... Are many folks are using Pound and Nginx?)
As passenger (and puppet) haven't been where they are now I started with mongrel and nginx. Since Brice's nginx patch(es) and my puppetmaster init.d script patch (multiple ports automagically start with mongrel) setting up nginx and mongrel (at least on redhat based systems) is _very_ easy.
Due to these historically reasons I'm still with nginx and mongrel and very happy. If I might finally switch to REE (any RPMs around anywhere which work in combination with passenger?) I might want to use passenger (maybe in combination with nginx, which I really like if I have no other http stuff to do), but first I'd like to get things like serving files directly with nginx working as this seems to be the bigger issue than the underlying ruby.
The main issue with passenger is/was (recently some popped up) the absence of usable RPMs. Hence as long as passenger is not that integrated or integrateable in enterprise distributions you will have a lot of people that will somehow (due to stupid policies) have to stick with what they can do with the existing packages. As they might be lucky to be allowed to get recent puppet packages on their systems, they might even have more problems to get passenger packages on their systems. Hence these people still would be happy to go with nginx/apache and mongrel.
cheers pete -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
