Hi Mike,
The same stuff (I think) that was on dev.aolserver.com is on
http://panoptic.com/wiki/aolserver/AOLserver_Wiki
I am not sure which was most up-to-date.
Dossy, do you look after the dev.aolserver.com site? I think it can
not connect to the database any more.
Nick
2009/6/3 Gahan, Mike
I have copies of some docs here:
http://rmadilo.com/files/as23docs/index.html
http://rmadilo.com/files/docs/toc.html
http://rmadilo.com/files/nsapi/
And various other info under:
http://rmadilo.com/files/
and Tcl, AOLserver and related docs:
http://junom.com/document/
You can search the alm
Hi all,
Where is the AOLserver online doc these days? I was using
http://dev.aolserver.com/wiki/Tcl_API but that is erroring now.
Mike Gahan
Architect / Analyst / Developer / Fixer
AOL (EU) Limited
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7348 8857
Email: mike.ga...@corp.aol.com
AIM: mikegahanuk
68 Hammers
Shaz will be sending out another message shortly with the list of the API's we need people to sign up to document. We're going to use SorceForge's tasks manager to keep track of these. I went ahead and added the nsv commands. Thanks to David Siktberg for signing up for these!
Here's an interestin
BLAARGH. My question has been answered so this
god-forsaken thread I started can die.
This is all degenerating into a discussion that has
already happened countless times in countless software
threads...
I've heard enough concerns, whetherv alid or invalid,
about the amount and quality of aolse
Dossy wrote:
> I also don't feel that the documentation "sucks." I think "sorely
> out of date" may be more accurate,
Sometimes I hate continuing a discussion that seems very off track. What
is better, an exhaustive O'Reilly 'Definitive Guide', or relatively
complete docs and a community willin
On 2001.05.01, Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, Kris, the 'entire list membership' doesn't feel that way. While
> everything can stand improvement (and I have seen some improvement in
> various areas in the last little while), the documentation could be much
> worse.
I also don't feel
Kris Rehberg wrote:
>
> Rather than having the entire list membership share their opinion over and
> over that the documentation "sucks", please join us and submit corrections
> to the Bug Tracker, Category: "Other:Documentation", Group: "documentation":
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=1031
t/tracker/?atid=103152&group_id=3152&func=browse
> >
> > Thanks for reading,
> >
> > Kris
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: AOLserver Discussion
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> > Of Michael Roberts
> &
essage-
> > From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> > Of Michael Roberts
> > Sent: Mon, 04-30-01 05:37p
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] aolserver documentation
> >
> >
> > > I've had many people tel
That was me. :-)
I just ran etags on the aolserver source and M-. in emacs, very cool.
The worst part of looking at source was trying to find where stuff is
defined -- but no more!
Jerry Asher wrote:
>
> >AOLserver itself is a very clean piece of code. I know it sucks to say,
> >read the code,
> -Original Message-
> From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Michael Roberts
> Sent: Mon, 04-30-01 05:37p
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] aolserver documentation
>
>
> > I've had many people tell me, "I b
TIGHT.
This is what I like to see. Very awesome.
-derek
--- Dossy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2001.04.30, ricard helene
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It would just be cool to have a better resource
> for aolserver
> > knowledge -- preferably compiled by those who know
> it best.
>
> I vo
On 2001.04.30, ricard helene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would just be cool to have a better resource for aolserver
> knowledge -- preferably compiled by those who know it best.
I volunteer my wiki, the AOLserver Wiki at
http://panoptic.com/wiki/aolserver as the home for
this resource.
I've
It would certainly be nice to have at least one O'Reilly text devoted to
AOLserver. When asked, I believe O'Reilly didn't see the market for it,
and that's hard to deny.
>AOLserver itself is a very clean piece of code. I know it sucks to say,
>read the code, but in this case, the code, emacs, a tag file, and the
>various communities can get you pretty far.
Earlier someone asked what a tag file is (I apologize, I took my
system down to replace some component
I found AOLserver after learning the basics of ASP and IIS. At the time
the documentation for AOLserver was complete, yet thin, in stark
compairison to ASP, which was released without much documentation at
all. The AOLserver docs haven't changed at all in the last three years,
not even the locatio
>I would like to see aolserver used more because I
>think it's great for alot of stuff... but, I know
>many people who aren't interested in losing time,
>energy, and brain cells trying to figure out
>aolserver's way of doing things.
>
>Maybe you guys are geniuses -- I'm not. That doesn't
>mean I
My intention was not to argue the philosophy of
software design.
I would like to see aolserver used more because I
think it's great for alot of stuff... but, I know
many people who aren't interested in losing time,
energy, and brain cells trying to figure out
aolserver's way of doing things.
Ma
> I've had many people tell me, "I believe you that
> aolserver is faster and more efficient than xxx
> webserver, but with php there is a vast repository of
> scripts and documents that allow me to not have to
> reinvent the wheel to do a simple thing." Of course,
> the end result of that logic
Well, I guess what I'm saying is that from the point
of view of a tech guy looking for a new web solution,
aolserver resources are not as visible as for, say,
zope or apache.
With one of the big selling points of aolserver being
that it's used by aol, I think some people expect a
larger resource
At 21:42 4/30/2001, you wrote:
>(..)
>the number one complaint is that the documentation
>sucks
Absolutely!
Aolserver + tcl thing is described close to unacceptable.
It was a great surprise for me that variables from submited form are not
available. I wasted couple of days to find a solution.
Any
Jerry Asher wrote:
>
> At 11:42 AM 4/30/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >I've read a couple of messages about newer versions of
> >aolserver to be released and I have a question.
> >
> >At my last company, we were using a drastically
> >inferior system for our web solution and we needed
> >something better
At 11:42 AM 4/30/01 -0700, you wrote:
>I've read a couple of messages about newer versions of
>aolserver to be released and I have a question.
>
>At my last company, we were using a drastically
>inferior system for our web solution and we needed
>something better. I happened upon aolserver and wa
I've read a couple of messages about newer versions of
aolserver to be released and I have a question.
At my last company, we were using a drastically
inferior system for our web solution and we needed
something better. I happened upon aolserver and was,
myself, pretty thoroughly convinced of it
25 matches
Mail list logo
