On Monday 07 February 2005 23:25, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
Seems fair. I assume you will be putting responses bypassing this
public list in some place where everybody can see them, right?
Unfortunately, no. I thought about this and decided that I want to
respect people's desire to remain
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 04:25:46PM -0500, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
Let's admit it, AS will never get so popular as apache or IIS and all
efforts for making it popular without something that will
differentiate it from apache is waste of time.
Maybe I'm deluded, but I'm not ready to admit this
Hi Dossy,
I think the reason behind both issues is because the proposed
contributions weren't that great. I'm sure this statement tweaks a lot
of people, but I think it's the truth.
I'm not the expert to verify that on the C level, but the situation was: There
was a solution done by aD from
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:06:21 +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is my wish-list. Do whatever you consider appropriate.
It is *far* from complete, but I guess I have to start with something.
(I have no reason of hiding it, I'm not secret service):
Interesting list. Here's
- Add hooks to plugin alternate filesystems (Tcl VFS) so you can serve
stuff out of zipfiles, for example
This in on my wish list as well. It would make plug-in storage for tDAV much
easier. Right now tDAV cannot take advantage of fastpath since it makes
C calls to the filesystem (for
This is my wish-list. Do whatever you consider appropriate.
It is *far* from complete, but I guess I have to start with something.
(I have no reason of hiding it, I'm not secret service):
* A debug/development mode that reveals all running filters,
triggered filters, better insight in
Hi - I read the entire thread mentioned below, and missed any mention of
anyone saying the AS maintainers would not accept FastCGI.
The other thing I guess I'm confused about, is that CGI is implemented
as an AS module. Why can't someone write a FastCGI module, and
whoever wants it can load it
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 11:04:24AM +0100, Bernd Eidenschink wrote:
I think the reason behind both issues is because the proposed
contributions weren't that great. I'm sure this statement tweaks a lot
of people, but I think it's the truth.
I'm not the expert to verify that on the C level,
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 06:16:58AM -0800, Jim Wilcoxson wrote:
Hi - I read the entire thread mentioned below, and missed any mention of
anyone saying the AS maintainers would not accept FastCGI.
Read the end John's 2005-02-07 post to that thread again.
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 11:33 -0500, Brooks Robertson wrote:
Hmm, I have a pub and priv key in the nsecrypt dir. The log also
indicates that the module was successfully loaded at startup. Would
bad keys cause an invalid command name error on ns_encrypt?
Nope. Are you using AOLserver 3.5.x or
In a message dated 2/8/2005 11:47:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nope. Are you using AOLserver 3.5.x or 4.x? I never updated the sourceto run under 4.x so no idea what problems could be caused.
I'm running 4.03 and using a binary from aolserver.com. Not sure where togo
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 06:20, Bernd Eidenschink wrote:
* Having a 'real' config file with _all_ default values.
Maybe the current grep-thru-code way could somehow be simplified.
Check my new, 'complete' config file:
http://rmadilo.com/m2/ starting at jnm.tcl
Config file is broken into
On 2005.02.08, Tom Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NOTE2: users of virtual servers running 4.0.8 or 4.0.9 should upgrade to
4.0.10, due to a DOS bug. If you need info, email me directly.
Unless this is a different DoS issue than the one we discussed, the
fix requiring defaultservers was added
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 02:24, Stephen Deasey wrote:
sourceforge, plus the following additional items:
Added a simple cookie API in C and Tcl.
Check out a tcl version of cookie code. It reads the Cookie header and writes
both Set-Cookie and Set-Cookie2 headers. I believe it parses
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 18:32, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 09:12:06AM -0800, Tom Jackson wrote:
* Some kind of watchdog functionality
Actually only a built in module would work very well, and fast. Every
solution
I've seen is a true hack, which is why it
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 09:31, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
On 2005.02.08, Tom Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NOTE2: users of virtual servers running 4.0.8 or 4.0.9 should upgrade to
4.0.10, due to a DOS bug. If you need info, email me directly.
Unless this is a different DoS issue than the
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 01:39:28 -0500, Andrew Piskorski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please, *OF COURSE* the 3 guys who want to add multi-protocol support
to the AOLserver core are a minority of AOLserver users! *YOU* are a
minority of AOLserver users too, Dossy.
Right. There's a huge difference
BNA uses AOLserver to produce publishing artifacts on web pages. We
publish subscription content on the web. We use the server to produce
HTML over the HTTP protocol. Our subscribers log into the web site and
read / print what they need to get their own jobs done. End of story.
The 5 line
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 17:54, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
- Convert docs in Tcl doctools format so you get instant HTML and
nroff output and deliver that with the distro
I'm not convinced that the Tcl doctools format is the way to go
Have you ever tried doctools? Why are you not
On 2005.02.08, Brooks Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm running 4.03 and using a binary from aolserver.com. Not sure where
to go from here. Thanks for the information.
Everyone,
Brooks NOT using the nsencrypt module that's in SourceForge and
available from aolserver.com. He's using a
We're interested in using this work, too. A lot of our deployments (especially
those that are focused on getting live [no-refresh] updates via JavaScript) end
up being slowed down by the requirement to adapt to Javascript cross-domain
security; we'd like to be able to run as an appserver behind
On 2005.02.08, John Sequeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a question regarding the multi-protocol patches discussed on
the list in August. Was a decision made on these? Is it likely that
AOLServer core would include this support anytime soon?
It depends on how you define soon but my
On 2005.02.08, Zoran Vasiljevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 17:54, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
- Convert docs in Tcl doctools format so you get instant HTML and
nroff output and deliver that with the distro
I'm not convinced that the Tcl doctools format is the way
On 2005.02.08, Rick Cobb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're interested in using this work, too. A lot of our deployments
(especially those that are focused on getting live [no-refresh]
updates via JavaScript) end up being slowed down by the requirement to
adapt to Javascript cross-domain security;
On Friday 04 February 2005 16:34, Tom Jackson wrote:
C. Working examples of database integration, expecially ODBC and if
possible MySQL.
Other examples are mentioned as foreign: OACS, for instance. Note that ACS,
and OACS are responsible for a large percentage of users, and these
projects
Dossy Shiobara dossy at PANOPTIC.COM writes:
To clarify, you want AOLserver to act as a FastCGI client? Can you
explain the benefit of this approach, rather than having the front-end
webserver simply proxy HTTP requests to AOLserver? This is where the
Apache team is going with Tomcat with
After lurking on the list for quite some time I have to say that I strongly
second many of Tom's comments.
PLEASE, don't take any of this personally none of it is aimed at
individuals, and none is intended as anything other than constructive
criticism.
My thoughts mixed in below:
On 2005.02.08, Tim Moss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If someone is offering to donate freely, commercial-grade hosting on
AOLserver, please contact me.
Surely AOL could provide this as a way of thanking the efforts of the
community developers?
The downside of this is that no one from outside
Dossy quoted Tom:
6. Split the discussion between C level source code and applications.
There's few enough AOLserver developers who deal at the C
code level that having a separate mailing list
In reply,
On Tuesday 08 February 2005 14:01, Tim Moss wrote:
I too don't think splitting
On 2005.02.08, John Sequeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you say integrated security are you talking about the NTLM auth
scheme for HTTP? As long as mod_proxy properly handles HTTP Keep-Alive,
and recent Apache mod_proxy does, NTLM auth should work just fine.
We're talking about
On 2005.02.08, Tom Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without discussion on the website about how to use AOLserver, via
Tutorials, etc. [...]
I urge anyone and everyone to contribute whatever tutorials they can
write:
http://aolserver.com/wiki/Tutorials
There's a few things already there,
Dossy Shiobara wrote:
On 2005.02.08, John Sequeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you sure about this? Do you have network sniffs showing what's
actually happening between the browser and the server(s)?
If Apache's mod_proxy is smart and its Keep-Alive is smart, then
fronting IIS and AOLserver with
On 2005.02.08, John Sequeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are correct. My point was only that AOLServer would get the header
unmodified, and then not be able to do anything useful with it lacking
something like nsntlm. If IIS sat in front (i.e. using FastCGI), IIS
could do the ntlm
On 2005.02.08, John Sequeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be clear, this isn't /replacing/ AOLserver with Apache or IIS, but
simply allowing Apache or IIS to front an AOLserver. I can totally
understand someone wanting to fund the necessary development to make
OpenACS or .LRN work without
-Original Message-
From: AOLserver Discussion
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dossy Shiobara
Sent: 08 February 2005 23:21
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver facelift.
On 2005.02.08, Tim Moss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If someone is offering to
-Original Message-
From: AOLserver Discussion
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Jackson
Sent: 09 February 2005 00:55
To: AOLSERVER@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver facelift.
Dossy quoted Tom:
6. Split the discussion between C level source code and
On 2005.02.09, Tim Moss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it is of any use to anyone (it worked around about 4.03 4.04 I think)
here's my sample config file with all of the server config values in it and
some of the common modules:
http://www.site-speed.com/aolserver/sample_nsd.tcl
One thing I
After reading throught the digest of the discussion on this list and
remembering Dossy's statement about donating a server, I'm more than
inclined to ask the OpenACS Core Team to allow the creation of an AOLserver
community at openacs.org or host a service on one of our machines. For one,
I think
While reading the previous postings I stumbled upon multiple mentioning of
multi protocol support and asterisk, therefore I assume people on this list
are knowledgeable about this topic.
Here is what we need:
We run a CRM system on top of AOLserver. The CRM system contains the phone
numbers of
39 matches
Mail list logo
