[Dancer-users] A Dancer based web site for "every" PM group

[Naveed Massjouni]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:27 PM, David Precious <davidp at preshweb.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 21:41 +0200, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> here is an idea that might be interesting.
>>
>> There are 250 or so PM groups.
>> pm.org currently only offers static web hosting.
>> If a PM group wants something more interesting
>> they need to put it on another server.
>>
>> What about setting up a server with Dancer and offering the pm
>> groups access to upload the static part of the web site?
> [...]
>> This would drive the creation of a Dancer based
>> content management system.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> Interesting idea indeed, I like it on principle, but if it's basically
> offering just static stuff, I don't see a big benefit.
>
> Potentially more interesting would be to set up a nice secure box, and
> let them run a fully dynamic Dancer-powered site, which would run under
> their account with their privileges only, and have e.g. Nginx as the
> front end proxying requests to it.
>
> That way, they could do whatever they wanted with Dancer, and, assuming
> the box is secure and permissions are set correctly, each group should
> not be able to affect the others (maybe CPU/memory limits would be
> useful, to catch any runaway code).
>
> I think the biggest problem is finding time to set up and manage such a
> service, and probable lack of demand from the start.  I'd imagine that,
> in general, whoever controls the site of a PM group has the skills and
> resources to set up their own site on their own server/VPS, but is
> probably just lacking the time to do so.
>
> It's entirely possible, however, that providing a quick & easy service
> might entice them to do more (particularly if we extol the virtues of
> Dancer's plugin ecosystem).
>
> This actually hits on a more general idea I've had floating in the back
> of my head for a while - a "turnkey" Dancer hosting service, where you'd
> simply upload your app, and the service would satisfy pre-requirements
> and fire up the app (probably using the aforementioned tactic of running
> it as the user, with their privileges tightly managed.

I think a PSGI hosting service would be cooler.
-Naveed

>
> Nginx could run and proxy requests to the app, and perhaps the app
> itself could be opened up if they wanted to do so, so they could have
> the option of keeping their domain/hostname pointing to their own server
> running Nginx/Apache/whatever, and just proxy requests over to the app.
>
> Such a thing could offer basic facilities free, and charge for higher
> bandwidth/CPU usage, and extra spare worker threads, etc.
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Dave P
>
> --
> David Precious <davidp at preshweb.co.uk> ("bigpresh")
> http://www.preshweb.co.uk/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dancer-users mailing list
> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>