Mailing List Archive

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:47:26 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> for some reason we still don't have the numbers for Oct 2004 from
> netcraft but regardless it's easy to see that the stats are getting
> worse all the time:
>
> http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/securityspace.html
> http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/netcraft.html

Isn't this probably caused in part by systems that don't have
'mod_perl' in their server signature and/or systems using a small
Apache front end with a mod_perl backend on another port?

I just checked my system at home and it doesn't report "mod_perl"
to NetCraft. Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
that and suggest it on the mailing list?

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:47:26 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>for some reason we still don't have the numbers for Oct 2004 from
>>netcraft but regardless it's easy to see that the stats are getting
>>worse all the time:
>>
>>http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/securityspace.html
>>http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/netcraft.html
>
>
> Isn't this probably caused in part by systems that don't have
> 'mod_perl' in their server signature and/or systems using a small
> Apache front end with a mod_perl backend on another port?

You mean the decline is because more and more people move to the
front-/back-end setup, and people aren't just moving to php?

> I just checked my system at home and it doesn't report "mod_perl"
> to NetCraft.

I think we discussed that earlier. If I remember correctly NetCraft can't
scan ports (even the known ones) due to legal reasons.

> Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
> that and suggest it on the mailing list?

Do you think it'll have any impact when we talk about hundreds of
thousands of users who aren't on the list and will never reach our site?

What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:18:47 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> You mean the decline is because more and more people move to the
> front-/back-end setup, and people aren't just moving to php?

Oh I'm sure some of the decline is people moving to PHP, Python,
Java, etc... but I don't think that we're losing as many people
as that survey says. The reason I say that is because doing a
"default" install of Apache2/mp2 via the instructions on
perl.apache.org, my server at home doesn't report that it is
using mod_perl.

I'm sure other people are in similar situations where they don't
even realize their server isn't claiming to be mod_perl powered.

> > Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
> > that and suggest it on the mailing list?
>
> Do you think it'll have any impact when we talk about hundreds of
> thousands of users who aren't on the list and will never reach our
> site?
>
> What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?

I wasn't really thinking about a scanner technique, but you're
right we wouldn't reach everyone via the mailing list. However,
if we could put the howto up on the website, mention it on the
list, etc it couldn't hurt to help boost those numbers.

It wouldn't be anything drastic, but shouldn't be much work for
us and/or the users.

While I think the NetCraft survey is important, maybe we should
attack this another way. Create our own "registered users" page,
like the Linux Counter site, where mod_perl users could list their
sites. This still wouldn't catch everyone, but every little bit
helps.

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Hi,

This may be a horrible suggestion. But I have seen one or two install
programs ask if they can send debugging info back to the source. Certainly
PHP does this when there are errors with tests.
What if at the conclusion of all of the tests, there was a prompt to ask
something like,"Count me as a mod_perl user. (y/n)" Or even something more
useful, like returning uname -a along with some basic info so that knowing
the tests were all successful is useful.

Or I guess for that matter why not just count downloads?

Thanks,

Eric



At 04:37 PM 11/1/2004, Frank Wiles wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:18:47 -0500
>Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
> > You mean the decline is because more and more people move to the
> > front-/back-end setup, and people aren't just moving to php?
>
> Oh I'm sure some of the decline is people moving to PHP, Python,
> Java, etc... but I don't think that we're losing as many people
> as that survey says. The reason I say that is because doing a
> "default" install of Apache2/mp2 via the instructions on
> perl.apache.org, my server at home doesn't report that it is
> using mod_perl.
>
> I'm sure other people are in similar situations where they don't
> even realize their server isn't claiming to be mod_perl powered.
>
> > > Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
> > > that and suggest it on the mailing list?
> >
> > Do you think it'll have any impact when we talk about hundreds of
> > thousands of users who aren't on the list and will never reach our
> > site?
> >
> > What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?
>
> I wasn't really thinking about a scanner technique, but you're
> right we wouldn't reach everyone via the mailing list. However,
> if we could put the howto up on the website, mention it on the
> list, etc it couldn't hurt to help boost those numbers.
>
> It wouldn't be anything drastic, but shouldn't be much work for
> us and/or the users.
>
> While I think the NetCraft survey is important, maybe we should
> attack this another way. Create our own "registered users" page,
> like the Linux Counter site, where mod_perl users could list their
> sites. This still wouldn't catch everyone, but every little bit
> helps.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
> http://www.wiles.org
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org


Lead Programmer
D.M. Contact Management
250.383.8267 ext 229


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Eric wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This may be a horrible suggestion. But I have seen one or two install
> programs ask if they can send debugging info back to the source.
> Certainly PHP does this when there are errors with tests.
> What if at the conclusion of all of the tests, there was a prompt to ask
> something like,"Count me as a mod_perl user. (y/n)" Or even something
> more useful, like returning uname -a along with some basic info so that
> knowing the tests were all successful is useful.

Thanks for the suggestion, Eric, but, my point was to try to stir again
the advocacy efforts which have quickly died since Aug. Not really to
figure out the exact number of users, which is not really feasible, IMHO.

> Or I guess for that matter why not just count downloads?

That's impossible, since there is no single source. mod_perl is
distributed through many channels, for most of which we have no control.

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:18:47 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>You mean the decline is because more and more people move to the
>>front-/back-end setup, and people aren't just moving to php?
>
>
> Oh I'm sure some of the decline is people moving to PHP, Python,
> Java, etc... but I don't think that we're losing as many people
> as that survey says. The reason I say that is because doing a
> "default" install of Apache2/mp2 via the instructions on
> perl.apache.org, my server at home doesn't report that it is
> using mod_perl.
>
> I'm sure other people are in similar situations where they don't
> even realize their server isn't claiming to be mod_perl powered.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't do that. But I think that no matter how
things are configured by default now, both stats counters give a good
indication that the user base is going down.

>>> Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
>>> that and suggest it on the mailing list?
>>
>>Do you think it'll have any impact when we talk about hundreds of
>>thousands of users who aren't on the list and will never reach our
>>site?
>>
>>What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?
>
>
> I wasn't really thinking about a scanner technique, but you're

I wasn't talking about the scanning technique. But the approach that will
tell the scanners that mod_perl is there :) If user sets ServerToken to
Off, you can't do much. And you can't enable it by default since some
believe it's a security issue.

> right we wouldn't reach everyone via the mailing list. However,
> if we could put the howto up on the website, mention it on the
> list, etc it couldn't hurt to help boost those numbers.
>
> It wouldn't be anything drastic, but shouldn't be much work for
> us and/or the users.

Sure, but I still want to hear first, what do you have on your mind, that
you want to propose to users?

> While I think the NetCraft survey is important, maybe we should
> attack this another way. Create our own "registered users" page,
> like the Linux Counter site, where mod_perl users could list their
> sites. This still wouldn't catch everyone, but every little bit
> helps.

Personally, I doubt we really want to do that. But if others are
interested, by all means go for it. I just think noone will really care,
and we will have the efforts wasted, which otherwise could be directed at
better venues. But what do I know :) Please don't consider that as a
discouraging note :)

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:46:12 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> Sure, but I still want to hear first, what do you have on your mind,
> that you want to propose to users?

A quick howto on the website for how to configure ServerToken so
that it will be detected by NetCraft.

> > While I think the NetCraft survey is important, maybe we should
> > attack this another way. Create our own "registered users" page,
> > like the Linux Counter site, where mod_perl users could list their
> > sites. This still wouldn't catch everyone, but every little bit
> > helps.
>
> Personally, I doubt we really want to do that. But if others are
> interested, by all means go for it. I just think noone will really
> care, and we will have the efforts wasted, which otherwise could be
> directed at better venues. But what do I know :) Please don't consider
> that as a discouraging note :)

Yeah I was just throwing that out there as an idea. I think if we
mention ServerToken, and it's role in mod_perl user counting, in
the installation instructions it might help to reduce the erosion
of the numbers.

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:35:34 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestion, Eric, but, my point was to try to stir
> again the advocacy efforts which have quickly died since Aug. Not
> really to figure out the exact number of users, which is not really
> feasible, IMHO.

Which reminds me something that I didn't mention on this list. The
article I submitted on mod_perl 2.0 will be in the January issue
of Sys Admin Magazine. Hopefully it will bring a few converts.

As I'm sure many of you have heard about the SpreadFirefox.com
campaign to do advertising via donations. I have been waiting for
long time to see a project do this, as I think it's a great way
to get exposure. Do you think we could pull something like this
off for mod_perl and/or perl itself?

I doubt we could raise the money for a full page NYT add, but we
may be able to raise enough money to get some banner ads, 1/4 page
in Dr. Dobbs, or something along those lines to tie into the final
mp2 release. Comments?

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:46:12 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Sure, but I still want to hear first, what do you have on your mind,
>>that you want to propose to users?
>
>
> A quick howto on the website for how to configure ServerToken so
> that it will be detected by NetCraft.

+1

>>> While I think the NetCraft survey is important, maybe we should
>>> attack this another way. Create our own "registered users" page,
>>> like the Linux Counter site, where mod_perl users could list their
>>> sites. This still wouldn't catch everyone, but every little bit
>>> helps.
>>
>>Personally, I doubt we really want to do that. But if others are
>>interested, by all means go for it. I just think noone will really
>>care, and we will have the efforts wasted, which otherwise could be
>>directed at better venues. But what do I know :) Please don't consider
>>that as a discouraging note :)
>
>
> Yeah I was just throwing that out there as an idea. I think if we
> mention ServerToken, and it's role in mod_perl user counting, in
> the installation instructions it might help to reduce the erosion
> of the numbers.

Sure, sounds good.

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:35:34 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks for the suggestion, Eric, but, my point was to try to stir
>>again the advocacy efforts which have quickly died since Aug. Not
>>really to figure out the exact number of users, which is not really
>>feasible, IMHO.
>
>
> Which reminds me something that I didn't mention on this list. The
> article I submitted on mod_perl 2.0 will be in the January issue
> of Sys Admin Magazine. Hopefully it will bring a few converts.

That's an excellent news, Frank!

> As I'm sure many of you have heard about the SpreadFirefox.com
> campaign to do advertising via donations. I have been waiting for
> long time to see a project do this, as I think it's a great way
> to get exposure. Do you think we could pull something like this
> off for mod_perl and/or perl itself?
>
> I doubt we could raise the money for a full page NYT add, but we
> may be able to raise enough money to get some banner ads, 1/4 page
> in Dr. Dobbs, or something along those lines to tie into the final
> mp2 release. Comments?

Certainly a good idea. The question is whether someone wants to lead the
effort and whether there are enough time resources to do that.

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:33:22 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> > As I'm sure many of you have heard about the SpreadFirefox.com
> > campaign to do advertising via donations. I have been waiting for
> > long time to see a project do this, as I think it's a great way
> > to get exposure. Do you think we could pull something like this
> > off for mod_perl and/or perl itself?
> >
> > I doubt we could raise the money for a full page NYT add, but we
> > may be able to raise enough money to get some banner ads, 1/4 page
> > in Dr. Dobbs, or something along those lines to tie into the final
> > mp2 release. Comments?
>
> Certainly a good idea. The question is whether someone wants to lead
> the effort and whether there are enough time resources to do that.

Maybe we could get help from the Perl foundation on this? Make it
part of their fund drive? As I'm sure they have the infrastructure
in place to handle the donations.

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:33:22 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>> As I'm sure many of you have heard about the SpreadFirefox.com
>>> campaign to do advertising via donations. I have been waiting for
>>> long time to see a project do this, as I think it's a great way
>>> to get exposure. Do you think we could pull something like this
>>> off for mod_perl and/or perl itself?
>>>
>>> I doubt we could raise the money for a full page NYT add, but we
>>> may be able to raise enough money to get some banner ads, 1/4 page
>>> in Dr. Dobbs, or something along those lines to tie into the final
>>> mp2 release. Comments?
>>
>>Certainly a good idea. The question is whether someone wants to lead
>>the effort and whether there are enough time resources to do that.
>
>
> Maybe we could get help from the Perl foundation on this? Make it
> part of their fund drive? As I'm sure they have the infrastructure
> in place to handle the donations.

That's certainly possible. But you probably want to have a separate effort
and just reuse the infrustructure of TPF for collecting money?

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:59:14 -0500
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:

> That's certainly possible. But you probably want to have a separate
> effort and just reuse the infrustructure of TPF for collecting money?

Correct. I don't think it would hurt to have it listed among the
other Perl efforts, but it would certainly be organized and ran by
someone in the mod_perl community and not just part of the normal
Perl efforts.

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:59:14 -0500
> Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>
>
>>That's certainly possible. But you probably want to have a separate
>>effort and just reuse the infrustructure of TPF for collecting money?
>
>
> Correct. I don't think it would hurt to have it listed among the
> other Perl efforts, but it would certainly be organized and ran by
> someone in the mod_perl community and not just part of the normal
> Perl efforts.

Sounds good. There is also the ASF side, something to check as well...

--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

Stas Bekman wrote:
> Frank Wiles wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:47:26 -0500
>>Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> wrote:
>>
>>>for some reason we still don't have the numbers for Oct 2004 from
>>>netcraft but regardless it's easy to see that the stats are getting
>>>worse all the time:
>>>
>>>http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/securityspace.html
>>>http://perl.apache.org/outstanding/stats/netcraft.html
>>
>>
>> Isn't this probably caused in part by systems that don't have
>> 'mod_perl' in their server signature and/or systems using a small
>> Apache front end with a mod_perl backend on another port?
>
> You mean the decline is because more and more people move to the
> front-/back-end setup, and people aren't just moving to php?

I just noticed that by default, Fedore Core ships httpd.conf with this
snippet:

#
# Don't give away too much information about all the subcomponents
# we are running. Comment out this line if you don't mind remote sites
# finding out what major optional modules you are running
ServerTokens OS

So that certainly doesn't help numbers.

>
>> I just checked my system at home and it doesn't report "mod_perl"
>> to NetCraft.
>
> I think we discussed that earlier. If I remember correctly NetCraft can't
> scan ports (even the known ones) due to legal reasons.
>
>> Maybe we should put together a quick howto on fixing
>> that and suggest it on the mailing list?
>
> Do you think it'll have any impact when we talk about hundreds of
> thousands of users who aren't on the list and will never reach our site?
>
> What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?

How about my X-Powered-By suggestion for a while ago ?

http://perl.apache.org/advocacy/issues.html#X_Powered_By

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe M. Chiasson m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ GPG KeyID : 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3A5A5

> > What technique to help the scanners were you thinking about?
>
> How about my X-Powered-By suggestion for a while ago ?
>
> http://perl.apache.org/advocacy/issues.html#X_Powered_By
>

i think that's a great idea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:31:48 -0800
"Philippe M. Chiasson" <gozer@ectoplasm.org> wrote:

> I just noticed that by default, Fedore Core ships httpd.conf with this
> snippet:
>
> #
> # Don't give away too much information about all the subcomponents
> # we are running. Comment out this line if you don't mind remote
> # sites finding out what major optional modules you are running
> ServerTokens OS
>
> So that certainly doesn't help numbers.

Yup that's what I was talking about when I was talking about my
system. Fedora and RHEL both do this and have been since IIRC around
RH 9.


> How about my X-Powered-By suggestion for a while ago ?
>
> http://perl.apache.org/advocacy/issues.html#X_Powered_By

I also agree this is a great idea. Especailly if I read this
correctly that it will work behind a dual Apache setup.

---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org