Re: [blohg] Integrating blohg with Mercurial
- Ry4an Brase
- 2012-05-21 @ 01:37
The only problem I can see is that you'll end up with the same issue
hgweb has: a lot of people who think that 'hg serve' (or 'hg blohg') is
a suitable substitute for a real wsgi container.
On #mercurial the number of folks coming in who are running 'hg serve'
in production environments is gobsmacking. They run into restart
problems, port conflicts, lack of logging, and are missing all the other
things that apache+modwsgi or apache+uwsgi or nginx+uwsgi get you for
I think the idea is a great way to start people out quickly and easily,
and 'hg blohg --init' would be great for that, but the support hassle
will be decidedly non-zero.
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 01:13:52AM -0300, Rafael Martins wrote:
> Hi all,
> as a Mercurial lover, and someone who wants to see blohg as the
> de-facto blogging engine of the Mercurial users, I`d like to integrate
> blohg with mercurial, as an extension, and remove the `blohg` script.
> Any comments about it? Downsides? Upsides?
> P.S.: I'm not suggesting to add blohg to the Mercurial distribution,
> obviously. It would be impossible. I just want to make it an
> extension, instead of a separated script.
> Best regards,
> Rafael Goncalves Martins
Ry4an Brase - http://ry4an.org/