Not for "you", for everyone. Like they already do with mod_php.

The argument being made:

If the host won't install mod_fcgi, why would they install mod_perlite? So why create mod_perlite?

If the host has installed mod_fcgi, what advantage would mod_perlite provide? So why create mod_perlite?

I'm a hypothetical user. My hypothetical $4.95 host won't install anything besides what's there, which is apache, php, and a perl interpreter. I have ftp access only. Can your project do the job?

I think the trick here is to get mod_perlite to the same status as mod_php, i.e. be provided by cheap web hosts in a way mod_perl isn't (because of the overhead of configuration on their part, and lack of isolation from other customers' code).

Obviously no cheap web host will do this today since mod_perlite doesn't exist yet. But if there something viable and a demand for it maybe they will provide this kind of support for Perl by default the same way they do for PHP.

Did that clear anything up?

/J

I don't understand the question. What's my project?

Every hosting provider has to decide what to provide for their customers on their servers, and the 3 main deciding factors are:

1. Do a lot of customers want it?
2. Will it be safe for us to provide?
3. Will it add any admin and/or support hassles?
AFAIK, not a lot of shared hosting setups provide mod_fcgi. If mod_perlite answers those three questions better than mod_fcgi, then it will be worth it for them to provide it.