Comments on: Masons and mason

By: Glen

Glen — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:05:59 +0000

The learning curve is much smaller in comparison to Catalyst, and it does much more for you than Mason. Moreover, it “feels” fresh, if that sort of thing appeals to you.

The documentation is clear enough to start using it, and the IRC channel #mojo is much more n00b friendly than #catalyst.

Join the revolution!

By: admin

admin — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:07:37 +0000

@hdp, oliver:
> Why does your post about HTML::Mason have sample Template::Toolkit code

I do not know. Something must have happened, perhaps not enough coffee, unexpected attack of stupidity, or maybe aliens were messing with my brain . Do not know how it happened, that I mistakenly put here TT. Sorry.

By: hdp

hdp — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:36:59 +0000

Why does your post about HTML::Mason have sample Template::Toolkit code and a link to an article about TT?

By: john napiorkowski

john napiorkowski — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:02:03 +0000

There’s work out there for integrating Mason with PSGI: “http://github.com/miyagawa/HTML-Mason-PSGIHandler”

Just not on CPAN yet. Sure people would love a hand getting it ready, not sure what’s considered unfinished.

I’m building a new Catalyst based website using Mason as the View since the devs here are quite proficient with it. Although most of the Catalyst examples are Template::Toolkit the Mason view works and has done the job. So give it a go!

By: Pedro Melo

Pedro Melo — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:54:02 +0000

Hi,

I have a production site running Mason since 2001, and I can say that it is great.

It doesn’t split your app cleanly over the now-common three layers, MVC, and it requires a mod_perl installation (FastCGI support is awkward at best).

On the other hand, deployment is a breeze, assuming that all your app required modules are already installed. You only need to rsync the files over to the production server, no need to “reload” the server.

I still use Mason for quick-and-dirty sites, and even for some big sites. The lack of support for PSGI is my biggest gripe right now.

Bye

By: Oliver Charles

Oliver Charles — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:36:30 +0000

That’s Template Toolkit, not Mason

By: as

as — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:55:43 +0000

just a few notes:
* mason is still living, even if website was spammed. it’s great system, however, it’s not full framework.
* example you published is not mason code but tempate-toolkit
* when you use catalyst, you can use many templating engines, such as template-toolkit, or even mason.
* i can only recommend mason, if it fits your needs and attitude. one of the best features is that it uses perl as template language, so for perl hackers, you do not need one language for program and another for templates (as most advanced template systems need).
* there is great free book about mason at http://www.masonbook.com/