Re: Strange Request

[David H. Adler]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 02:45:30PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> 
> We simply can't compete with Matt on backwards compatibility as his scripts 
> all run on 4.036!

If you call that "running"... :-/

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"I was under medication when I made the decision not to burn the
tapes." - President Richard Nixon

Re: Strange Request

[Philip Newton]

Redvers Davies wrote:
> Is IO::Socket cross platform?

I believe so. At least, if the platform supports sockets.

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Redvers Davies]

> *need* to configure #!.

#!/bin/sh

*ducks*

Re: Strange Request

[Redvers Davies]

> I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> hits your cross-platform compatibility.

Is IO::Socket cross platform?

re: Matt's Scripts

[Philip Newton]

Dave Cross wrote:
> At 16:39 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
> >#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit 
> this to point to
> >where Perl [version 5.00x or above] is installed on your machine".
> 
> Can you put something like that above the shebang line? I 
> thought that #! had to be the first two chars in the file.

Well, OK; below the shebang line, then.

Cheers,
philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Damian's Diary

[Piers Cawley]

Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Dave Cross wrote:
> > Damian's hectic world tour has now finished and he's had time 
> > to update his online diary. He says a lot of nice things about
> > us here 
> > .
> 
> Not least of which, perhaps, is
> 
> The presence of Piers Cawley, Dave Cross, Greg McCarroll,
> Léon Brocard, and Tony Bowden also meant that at that one
> gathering I was able to spend time with the contributers of
> over half my YAS grant. It was very humbling to think that
> this community of clever and competent people had shown such
> faith in me. 
> 
> Not some faceless American corporation, but London.pmers (with values of
> "London" including Belfast and wherever Piers lives).

Well, London is where I tend to work. I live in Newark on Trent.
Somehow I don't think Damian is going to manage to find time to visit
me there though.

-- 
Piers

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Chris Devers]

At 05:03 PM 13.3.2001 +, you wrote:
>>No, most people using these scripts don't have command line access to >the servers 
>that they need to install the scripts on. We'd have to do >something like:
>>
>>go to http://www.yoursite.com/cgi-bin/randtext2.pl?mode=configure
>>
>>and then have configure itself online.
>
>Good point!  The script would already have to have the correct shebang 
>in order for this to work.  Also, we can't necessarily assume that the
>script would have write access to the disk (or itself) when it is run
>through the web server.

What about using some kind of binary wrapper (or shell? Not sure which would be 
easier...) that finds out where perl is installed, sets the shebang line accordingly, 
and then turns over control to the script itself. I realize this would be kind of a 
pain, but it gets at least part of the way around some of the problems here. 



--
Chris Devers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
webmaster Skillcheck

Re: Damian's Diary

[David H. Adler]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:12:18PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > 
> > Not some faceless American corporation, but London.pmers (with values of
> > "London" including Belfast and wherever Piers lives).
> > 
> 
> London.pm is not just a regional user group, a state of mind (liver?).
> Even dha is a London.pm'er although he may not care to admit it ;-)

Oh, no question.  I'm just glad I don't have to actually take
responsibility for you guys...

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Perl can certainly be used as a first computer language, but it was
really designed to be a *last* computer language. - Larry Wall

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 16:55 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>At 16:53 13/03/01 +, you wrote:
> >At 16:39 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >>Dave Cross wrote:
> >> > Oops. I just did the Random Text one.
> >
> >>And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
> >>#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit this to point to
> >>where Perl [version 5.00x or above] is installed on your machine".
> >
> >Can you put something like that above the shebang line? I thought that #!
> >had to be the first two chars in the file.
>
>Could we write some sort of internal installer process so the instruction
>to the user would be type 'perl rand_text2.pl configure' and the script
>then rewrites itself.  Updating #! lines etc, possibly even asking
>configuration questions which get written to config files.

I'd like to do that, but bear in mind that the majority of our audience 
only have ftp access to their web server. So an installation script would 
be pointless for them.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:38:52PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > I neither know nor care.  I was taking issue with your claim that relying
> > > on /usr/lib/sendmail is a good idea.
> > This arose because of your original claim that relying on an SMTP listener
> > is a good idea. What happens if, say, your reverse DNS is temporarily
> > unavailable
> Then you have more important things to worry about, such as finding an
> ISP with a clue.

Yes, agreed. But you shouldn't just be injecting mail unless you know what
will happen on failure. Handling errors sensibly is a part of good
programming.

> > and some hosts are deferring messages from you? This policy
> > will probably be implemented across backup MXs too. SMTP allows for
> > deferral. If you can't stick them on a queue, you shouldn't be trying to
> > do SMTP.
> Why not?  It's not as if the sort of people using web-mail scripts without
> their own mail server have anything important to say.  If it was important,
> they would invest in their own server or at least an ISP that provided
> appropriate facilities.

Personally I don't want to lose mail. This could happen if I try to do
SMTP and get it wrong. It is less likely to happen with (eg) batch SMTP or
a sendmail -t implementation.

> Of course, what you should do is try *both*.  Actually, you should first
> try to use a module.  If that fails, see if /usr/lib/sendmail exists and
> is executable.  If it is, then great, use it.  If it isn't available, try
> direct SMTP.  Graceful degradation is a Good Thing.

Agreed. What do you think the module will do? :)

> >  /usr/lib/sendmail is a good interface for not worrying about
> > this, as it will always put messages on a queue in the first place. 4xx
> > are deferrals.
> > Also, some MXs are *slow*. How do you guarantee to do your SMTP
> > asynchronously from your HTTP transaction?
> > If you neither know nor care, then why advocate this in the first place?
> Cos it's wrong to just assume sendmail is available.

It's also wrong to assume that SMTP is available. :)

> BTW, try reading what I write in future.  If you had, you would have
> noticed that I said "(joke)" after talking about looking for relays.

I wasn't actually replying to that, if you go back in the cascade. I
realise that that is a joke :). It was the other bit I was replying to.

> If you think that counts as 'advocating' that, then I would suggest
> investing in some English lessons.

You might want these lessons, to read the cascade. That was a seperate
subthread. sorry. you lose.

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Matthew Robinson]

At 16:55 13/03/01 -, you wrote:
>> Could we write some sort of internal installer process so the
>> instruction
>> to the user would be type 'perl rand_text2.pl configure' and
>> the script
>> then rewrites itself.  Updating #! lines etc, possibly even asking
>
>No, most people using these scripts don't have command line access to the
>servers that they need to install the scripts on. We'd have to do something
>like:
>
>go to http://www.yoursite.com/cgi-bin/randtext2.pl?mode=configure
>
>and then have configure itself online.

Good point!  The script would already have to have the correct shebang in
order for this to work.  Also, we can't necessarily assume that the script
would have write access to the disk (or itself) when it is run through the
web server.

Matt

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Jonathan Peterson]

> Could we write some sort of internal installer process so the
> instruction
> to the user would be type 'perl rand_text2.pl configure' and
> the script
> then rewrites itself.  Updating #! lines etc, possibly even asking

No, most people using these scripts don't have command line access to the
servers that they need to install the scripts on. We'd have to do something
like:

go to http://www.yoursite.com/cgi-bin/randtext2.pl?mode=configure

and then have configure itself online.

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

Weee!  Cascade!

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:38:52PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > > > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> > > > > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> > > > > > hits your cross-platform compatibility.
> > > > > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface.
> > > > And for those unfortunate enough to be using Windows?
> > > Then are they going to be running an SMTP listener? If so, where?
> > I neither know nor care.  I was taking issue with your claim that relying
> > on /usr/lib/sendmail is a good idea.
> 
> This arose because of your original claim that relying on an SMTP listener
> is a good idea. What happens if, say, your reverse DNS is temporarily
> unavailable

Then you have more important things to worry about, such as finding an
ISP with a clue.

> and some hosts are deferring messages from you? This policy
> will probably be implemented across backup MXs too. SMTP allows for
> deferral. If you can't stick them on a queue, you shouldn't be trying to
> do SMTP.

Why not?  It's not as if the sort of people using web-mail scripts without
their own mail server have anything important to say.  If it was important,
they would invest in their own server or at least an ISP that provided
appropriate facilities.

Of course, what you should do is try *both*.  Actually, you should first
try to use a module.  If that fails, see if /usr/lib/sendmail exists and
is executable.  If it is, then great, use it.  If it isn't available, try
direct SMTP.  Graceful degradation is a Good Thing.

>  /usr/lib/sendmail is a good interface for not worrying about
> this, as it will always put messages on a queue in the first place. 4xx
> are deferrals.
> 
> Also, some MXs are *slow*. How do you guarantee to do your SMTP
> asynchronously from your HTTP transaction?
> 
> If you neither know nor care, then why advocate this in the first place?

Cos it's wrong to just assume sendmail is available.

BTW, try reading what I write in future.  If you had, you would have
noticed that I said "(joke)" after talking about looking for relays.
If you think that counts as 'advocating' that, then I would suggest
investing in some English lessons.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Matthew Robinson]

At 16:53 13/03/01 +, you wrote:
>At 16:39 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>>Dave Cross wrote:
>> > Oops. I just did the Random Text one.
>
>>And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
>>#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit this to point to
>>where Perl [version 5.00x or above] is installed on your machine".
>
>Can you put something like that above the shebang line? I thought that #! 
>had to be the first two chars in the file.

Could we write some sort of internal installer process so the instruction
to the user would be type 'perl rand_text2.pl configure' and the script
then rewrites itself.  Updating #! lines etc, possibly even asking
configuration questions which get written to config files.

Matt

>
>Dave...
>
>
>
>-- 
>  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Data Munging with Perl 
>
>
>

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Philip Newton wrote:
> Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published 
> > interface.
> (As others have already written, no /usr/lib/sendmail [or /usr/lib, for that
> matter] on Win2K or NT web servers.)

See my replies to this...

> > /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem
> > is your friend (and remember to check $?)
> Hm, didn't know about -oem. BTW, the Perl FAQ (`perldoc -q "send mail"`)
> suggests -oi as well.

Yes. Mea culpa, as I've already said

> > Admittedly, this may break on any system that uses the MTA 
> > which shall not be named[1]
> Or places that have /usr/sbin/sendmail? Or other weird places?

Most of those *should* have a symlink to /usr/lib/sendmail, as this is the
traditional place for it...

If they haven't, other things may well break.

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 16:39 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>Dave Cross wrote:
> > Oops. I just did the Random Text one.
>
>Two comments:
>
>- what's with the "\%\%" in the separator? '%' isn't special in
>double-quoted strings, last time I checked. This looks like Mattcode which
>backwhacks just about anything ("$hh\:$mm\:$ss" comes to mind, for example).

Yep. Just took Matt's string and assigned it to $/. This was a mistake :)

>- s/chmod 744/chmod 644/ , probably

Again - placing too much trust in Matt.

This is why we have code reviews!

>And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
>#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit this to point to
>where Perl [version 5.00x or above] is installed on your machine".

Can you put something like that above the shebang line? I thought that #! 
had to be the first two chars in the file.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Philip Newton]

David Cantrell wrote:
> Alternatively, just look up the recipient's mail server and 
> talk SMTP to it.  If you can't connect, try the backup servers.
> If there aren't any, then the recipient is too lame to talk to
> us.

I'd suggest trying to look for an A record if there's no MX record for a
domain. I believe most MTAs do so as well.

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Strange Request

[Philip Newton]

Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published 
> interface.

(As others have already written, no /usr/lib/sendmail [or /usr/lib, for that
matter] on Win2K or NT web servers.)

> /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem
> 
> is your friend (and remember to check $?)

Hm, didn't know about -oem. BTW, the Perl FAQ (`perldoc -q "send mail"`)
suggests -oi as well.

> Admittedly, this may break on any system that uses the MTA 
> which shall not be named[1]

Or places that have /usr/sbin/sendmail? Or other weird places?

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Robert Shiels]

From: "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 13 March 2001 15:47
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts


> At 14:23 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
>
> Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down really
I
> suppose. Here it is if you're interested.
>
This works on my win32 box, and is more random than Matts, and required one
less line change for me.

1 down !

I'll do some more testing if you want, I'm quite good at breaking things
.

I have access to Linux (apache), WinME/98 (apache/PWS), WinNT(IIS) and
Mac(Mac!) boxes.

/Robert

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Robin Houston wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem
> Use -oi as well.
> You don't want "\n.\n" to terminate the message prematurely.

Yes, indeed. Self-LART applied.

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:20:48PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and
> > > > then just talk SMTP to them.  Someone stupid enough to not be able to
> > > > install modules is stupid enough to have open relays.
> > > If it's the local network the ability to relay SMTP through a machine
> > > would be entirely sensible, surely?
> > Ah. Now what you want is to get a machine off ORBS to try and relay mail
> > through them with some source-routed path :) That's the way to abuse
> > them. :)
> Alternatively, just look up the recipient's mail server and talk SMTP to
> it.  If you can't connect, try the backup servers.  If there aren't any,
> then the recipient is too lame to talk to us.  If the administrator is
> preventing your webserver from talking SMTP, then he should be beaten
> mercilessly.

You're missing the point. What happens if at any stage it gives you a 4xx
(deferral) response? what do you do then? What happens if the connection
times out in the middle? What happens if it doesn't accept responsibility
for delivery (gives you any kind of error after the final '.')? If the
backup MX is configured with the same policy, then it may well do the
same... Will your system take responsibility for non-delivery? What will
it do?

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: MSA rewrite project

[Philip Newton]

Roger Burton West wrote:
[feasibility of putting .pm files next to a script]
> I believe IIS does horribly evil things to the current execution
> directory.

I wouldn't be surprised. I believe it also does funky things with %ENV, such
that you can't do 'keys %ENV' and get all the keys, as somehow, some keys
are only put into the environment when you first access them for reading. Or
something.

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Jonathan Peterson]

> Yes, but *is a security hole, and not a small one*, usually.

Yes, if you put the wrong things in there, like locations of files. I guess
maybe Matt does this. On the other hand, other things can go in harmlessly,
and should, such as the response email address for formmail.

As for the security issue, there's no reason why we can't place extra layers
of checking in for these values (although of course that may not close all
holes).

I suppose in extreme cases where the original is a security nightmare, the
backward compatability mode should be off by default rather than on by
default - but if we don't acheive easy compatability no-one will use the
replacements.

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Philip Newton]

Dave Cross wrote:
> Oops. I just did the Random Text one.

Two comments:

- what's with the "\%\%" in the separator? '%' isn't special in
double-quoted strings, last time I checked. This looks like Mattcode which
backwhacks just about anything ("$hh\:$mm\:$ss" comes to mind, for example).
- s/chmod 744/chmod 644/ , probably

And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit this to point to
where Perl [version 5.00x or above] is installed on your machine".

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> > > > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> > > > > hits your cross-platform compatibility.
> > > > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface.
> > > And for those unfortunate enough to be using Windows?
> > Then are they going to be running an SMTP listener? If so, where?
> I neither know nor care.  I was taking issue with your claim that relying
> on /usr/lib/sendmail is a good idea.

This arose because of your original claim that relying on an SMTP listener
is a good idea. What happens if, say, your reverse DNS is temporarily
unavailable, and some hosts are deferring messages from you? This policy
will probably be implemented across backup MXs too. SMTP allows for
deferral. If you can't stick them on a queue, you shouldn't be trying to
do SMTP. /usr/lib/sendmail is a good interface for not worrying about
this, as it will always put messages on a queue in the first place. 4xx
are deferrals.

Also, some MXs are *slow*. How do you guarantee to do your SMTP
asynchronously from your HTTP transaction?

If you neither know nor care, then why advocate this in the first place?

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: MSA rewrite project

[Roger Burton West]

On or about Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 05:34:03PM +0100, Philip Newton typed:

>Generally, @INC contains '.', so it should work (though remember that
>Net::SMTP has to go into ./Net/SMTP.pm and not ./SMTP.pm or ./Net::SMTP.pm).
>Otherwise, use lib '.' should be your friend.

I believe IIS does horribly evil things to the current execution
directory.

Roger

Re: MSA rewrite project

[Philip Newton]

Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> 2. including the required modules as simple .pm files to be 
> uploaded to the same directory as the script file. (i.e. no
> proper 'perl Makefile.PL;make;make test;make install).
> 
> Assuming that 2 actually works, which is should in many but 
> not all cases.

Generally, @INC contains '.', so it should work (though remember that
Net::SMTP has to go into ./Net/SMTP.pm and not ./SMTP.pm or ./Net::SMTP.pm).
Otherwise, use lib '.' should be your friend.

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Strange Request

[Robin Houston]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:

> /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem

Use -oi as well.
You don't want "\n.\n" to terminate the message prematurely.

 .robin.

-- 
"Sometimes I sit in front of my washing machine and contemplate the
 worthlessness of life.  My washing machine isn't even plugged in."
--alex

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:20:48PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and
> > > then just talk SMTP to them.  Someone stupid enough to not be able to
> > > install modules is stupid enough to have open relays.
> > If it's the local network the ability to relay SMTP through a machine
> > would be entirely sensible, surely?
> 
> Ah. Now what you want is to get a machine off ORBS to try and relay mail
> through them with some source-routed path :) That's the way to abuse
> them. :)

Alternatively, just look up the recipient's mail server and talk SMTP to
it.  If you can't connect, try the backup servers.  If there aren't any,
then the recipient is too lame to talk to us.  If the administrator is
preventing your webserver from talking SMTP, then he should be beaten
mercilessly.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> > > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> > > > hits your cross-platform compatibility.
> > > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface.
> > And for those unfortunate enough to be using Windows?
> 
> Then are they going to be running an SMTP listener? If so, where?

I neither know nor care.  I was taking issue with your claim that relying
on /usr/lib/sendmail is a good idea.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Jonathan Peterson]

> IIRC the problem with some of them is that they use config
> data supplied
> in form variables... do we really want to maintain this?

Yes, we do. It's a useful way of supplying configuration information,
because editing form fields in HTML has a lower fear threshold than editing
perl source files. And then if the junior office slave asked to make the
change uploads the file in file in binary after editing it on his PC, it
will break the perl script but not the HTML form.

Such is real life :-)

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Hodgkinson]

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> 
> At 14:23 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
> > > rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules,
> > > -T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
> > >
> > > Random Image Displayer daveh
> > > Random Link Generator  daveh
> > > Random Textdaveh
> 
> Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down really I 
> suppose. Here it is if you're interested.

I surrender. You did it far better than I would have. And quicker.

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
> > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and
> > then just talk SMTP to them.  Someone stupid enough to not be able to
> > install modules is stupid enough to have open relays.
> If it's the local network the ability to relay SMTP through a machine
> would be entirely sensible, surely?

Ah. Now what you want is to get a machine off ORBS to try and relay mail
through them with some source-routed path :) That's the way to abuse
them. :)

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> > > hits your cross-platform compatibility.
> > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface.
> And for those unfortunate enough to be using Windows?

Then are they going to be running an SMTP listener? If so, where?

What happens if a temporary failure means that you can't deliver the
message? You'll lose mail. :( Ugh.

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> > hits your cross-platform compatibility.
> 
> Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface.

And for those unfortunate enough to be using Windows?

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

Re: Strange Request

[Matthew Byng-Maddick]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
> I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> hits your cross-platform compatibility.

Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interface. You
cannot rely on an SMTP listener, especially on a web-server.

/usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem

is your friend (and remember to check $?)

Admittedly, this may break on any system that uses the MTA which shall not
be named[1], but I think that bit of its /usr/lib/sendmail interface works
properly.

[1] qm**l

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick   Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/   Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
Tell me,  O Octopus, I begs,  /  Is those things arms, or is they legs?  /
I marvel at thee, Octopus; / If I were thou, I'd call me us. -- Ogden Nash

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:00:41PM +, Dave Cross wrote:

> I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
> that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
> hits your cross-platform compatibility.

Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and
then just talk SMTP to them.  Someone stupid enough to not be able to
install modules is stupid enough to have open relays.

(joke)

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

MSA rewrite project

[Jonathan Peterson]

>
> Dave Cross wrote:
> > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules"
> > rule, which is that we'll have to send all mail by piping
> > to sendmail. And that really hits your cross-platform
> > compatibility.
>
> Well, it depends on how much pain you want to inflict on yourself.
>

Which is a greater evil:
1. writing the code to not require non-standard modules.
2. including the required modules as simple .pm files to be uploaded to the
same directory as the script file. (i.e. no proper 'perl
Makefile.PL;make;make test;make install).

Assuming that 2 actually works, which is should in many but not all cases.

I suggest that 2 is the less of two weevils, in those places where it works.

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 15:47 13/03/2001, you wrote:

> > OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
> > rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no
> > external modules,
> > -T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
>
>To which we should add that in default configuration the new script has the
>same input and output requirements as the old script, such that no
>re-writing of HTML forms or config files is needed when deploying the new
>script.

Correct. But Matt's scripts don't have config files IIRC - it's all done by 
editing variables at the top of the script file.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 15:44 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>Dave wrote:
>
> > Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down 
> really I
> > suppose. Here it is if you're interested.
>
>And what's wrong with the following line? ;-)
>
>#!/usr/local/bin/perl -w

D'Oh. It's a fair cop :-)

In my defense, there isn't any data that could be tainted - but rules is rules!

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

RE: Matt's Scripts

[Jonathan Peterson]

> OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
> rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no
> external modules,
> -T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.

To which we should add that in default configuration the new script has the
same input and output requirements as the old script, such that no
re-writing of HTML forms or config files is needed when deploying the new
script.

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Mark Fowler]

Dave wrote:
 
> Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down really I 
> suppose. Here it is if you're interested.

And what's wrong with the following line? ;-)

#!/usr/local/bin/perl -w

-- 
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
   Name  => 'Mark Fowler',Title => 'Technology Developer'  ,
   Firm  => 'Profero Ltd',Web   => 'http://www.profero.com/'   ,
   Email => '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone => '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 15:18 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at 
>rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules, 
>-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
>
>Guestbook davorg
>WWWboard  davorg




-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

At 14:23 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
> > rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules,
> > -T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
> >
> > Random Image Displayer daveh
> > Random Link Generator  daveh
> > Random Textdaveh

Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down really I 
suppose. Here it is if you're interested.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 
 rand_text2.pl

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Mark Fowler]

> Textclock   Mark
> Countdown   Mark

Later.

Mark.

-- 
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
   Name  => 'Mark Fowler',Title => 'Technology Developer'  ,
   Firm  => 'Profero Ltd',Web   => 'http://www.profero.com/'   ,
   Email => '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone => '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )

Re: Strange Request

[Leo Lapworth]

Ok, this is obviously a good idea, some comment / ideas:

1) Create nms server (Not Matt Scripts).
- setup mailing list(s).
- I'm happy to host in a couple of weeks

2) Review and work out a 'core' module which
   can be part of the distrobution and impliment
   CGI.pm equiv stuff for ALL modules.
- referer checker
- CGI parser
- Security stuff ?
- Other.. ?
   - Maybe there should be a user 'sys_conf' file
 where all the user configurations go, making
 it easier than Matt's having to edit each file.

3) Create a 'standard' - methods, documentation etc.

4) Put someone in charge of each script:
responsible for:
- Review of current code
- Creating a doc with all features
- current (rand_image
- which could be added. (rand_image support image size!s)
- Sending this to the mailing list
- Following up all comments.
- Re-coding (either with others or not).

- Test procedure for platforms / configurations.

5) Workout how we will catagroies these pieces of code,
keywords, requirements, tests done etc..

5) Create web site with:
- Easy to use 'standard' aka Matt esk section
- Other modules which need more installs (e.g. TT based)
- Complex modules (require configuration / mod_perl)

6) Repeat for other non-Matt code, e.g. forums / BBS's

Does anyone know if CPAN's pause system available,
could we impliment it for this project ? - or would
a new system be better ?

Anyway, as I said I'll give it a go setting something
up in a couple of weeks if someone hasn't got there first.

Cheers

Leo

Re: Strange Request

[Aaron Trevena]

### warning - creature feep ###

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Aaron Trevena wrote:
> > 
> > this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
> > collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
> > denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
> > just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.
> 
> I don't think we actually need to lower to teh lowest common denominator -
> by applying the ROPE idea it should be possible to provide some easy
> bundles with their own namespace that the user can just unzip and ftp to
> their own local_modules/rope.
> 
> If you provide scripts that work with perl5.x base but also provide
> scripts that use rope::lite, or rope::intermediate bundles the user will
> still be interested in using the bundle and we can encourage them to use
> modules and set them on the path to rightesusness.
> 
> I think something like this would be the ultimate test of the ROPE
> concept.

Given that there will be idiot proof scripts replacing msa ones, these
will be limited greatly by not using modules, assuming a simple web based
layout you can hive nice icons saying that Script N is **ready to run**,
**requires rope::lite**, **requires rope::intermediate**, **requires quite
a lot**, **requires apache**, **requires a little know how**, etc.

A.


-- 
http://termisoc.org/~betty"> Betty @ termisoc.org 
"As a youngster Fred fought sea battles on the village pond using a 
complex system of signals he devised that was later adopted by the Royal 
Navy. " (this email has nothing to do with any organisation except me)

Re: Strange Request

[Struan Donald]

* at 13/03 15:23 + Aaron Trevena said:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> 
> > * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts 
> > > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt 
> > > Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we 
> > > should be able to do it too.
> > > 
> > 
> > i originally shared your viewpoint on this, but what changed my
> > mind is the following scenario,
> > 
> > some random perl monger, lets call them dave for ease has
> > a really cool forums script. unfortunatly dave's script
> > uses TT and dave hasn't time to replace the TT elements.
> > 
> > do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it
> > uses TT?
> > 
> > this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
> > collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
> > denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
> > just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.
> 
> I don't think we actually need to lower to teh lowest common denominator -
> by applying the ROPE idea it should be possible to provide some easy
> bundles with their own namespace that the user can just unzip and ftp to
> their own local_modules/rope.
> 
> If you provide scripts that work with perl5.x base but also provide
> scripts that use rope::lite, or rope::intermediate bundles the user will
> still be interested in using the bundle and we can encourage them to use
> modules and set them on the path to rightesusness.
> 
> I think something like this would be the ultimate test of the ROPE
> concept.


bundle?
namespace?
help, this looks complex
mmm, matt's script archive: one file is all i need!


although this is only with ref to replacements for the matt wright
stuff.

struan

Re: Strange Request

[Philip Newton]

Dave Cross wrote:
> I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" 
> rule, which is that we'll have to send all mail by piping
> to sendmail. And that really hits your cross-platform
> compatibility.

Well, it depends on how much pain you want to inflict on yourself.

socket and connect are part of core Perl, so there's nothing stopping you
opening a socket to a mail server's port 25 and talking SMTP to it. And if
you're slightly less masochistic, I believe Socket is also part of standard
Perl (at least of current Perls), which gives you inet_aton, sockaddr_in,
AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, and so on -- and for the next level, you have
IO::Socket (also standard as of 5.004, according to `perldoc perlipc`),
which allows you to connect as easily as IO::Socket::INET->new(Proto=>'tcp',
PeerAddr=>'mailhost', PeerPort=>'smtp(25)').

It *is* possible to send mail (at least via SMTP) without needing any
modules from CPAN. Just like it's possible to do CGI form decoding without
CGI.pm. The question is whether this makes sense in general, but it's not
impossible to do without external modules -- you just end up either
re-inventing lots of wheels or copy-and-pasting from the CPAN module in
question :-).

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Strange Request

[Aaron Trevena]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:

> * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts 
> > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt 
> > Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we 
> > should be able to do it too.
> > 
> 
> i originally shared your viewpoint on this, but what changed my
> mind is the following scenario,
> 
>   some random perl monger, lets call them dave for ease has
>   a really cool forums script. unfortunatly dave's script
>   uses TT and dave hasn't time to replace the TT elements.
> 
> do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it
> uses TT?
> 
> this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
> collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
> denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
> just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.

I don't think we actually need to lower to teh lowest common denominator -
by applying the ROPE idea it should be possible to provide some easy
bundles with their own namespace that the user can just unzip and ftp to
their own local_modules/rope.

If you provide scripts that work with perl5.x base but also provide
scripts that use rope::lite, or rope::intermediate bundles the user will
still be interested in using the bundle and we can encourage them to use
modules and set them on the path to rightesusness.

I think something like this would be the ultimate test of the ROPE
concept.

A. 

-- 
http://termisoc.org/~betty"> Betty @ termisoc.org 
"As a youngster Fred fought sea battles on the village pond using a 
complex system of signals he devised that was later adopted by the Royal 
Navy. " (this email has nothing to do with any organisation except me)

Re: Matt's Scripts

[alex]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:

> Formmail - alex@state51

will take more later if there are some left over

-- 
a member of the state51 conspiracy
tonight i'm gonna party like it's (time_t) 1E9
dadadodo> IE5 PIPE CRACK always SMOKING

Re: Matt's Scripts

[Dave Hodgkinson]

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at 
> rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules, 
> -T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
> 
> Random Image Displayer daveh
> Random Link Generator  daveh
> Random Textdaveh


-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Hodgkinson]

Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> * Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > 
> > How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with
> > machines/laptops, pair programming...
> > 
> 
> have you ever tried herding cats?

food and lots of stroking

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Matt's Scripts

[Dave Cross]

OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at 
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules, 
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.

Guestbook
WWWboard
Counter
Formmail
Random Image Displayer
Random Link Generator
Textclock
Countdown
Free For All Links
Simple Search
Textcounter
HTTP Cookie Library
SSI Random Image Generator
Random Text
Animation

And if you want to look at Matt's code, it's all at 


Dave...


-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Greg McCarroll]

* Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> 
> How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with
> machines/laptops, pair programming...
> 

have you ever tried herding cats?


-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Hodgkinson]

How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with
machines/laptops, pair programming...



-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Strange Request

[Robert Shiels]

From: "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


>
> You need to define a standard and stick to it. I suggest we write to Perl
> 5.004_04 as it was a) pretty stable and b) the first to include CGI.pm.
>
Agreed. I just installed one of his scripts on my laptop, Win98, Apache
1.3.9, ActiveState's Perl5.6. There were comments in the code to make it run
OK on Win32 and I had it working in no time.

/Robert

Re: Strange Request

[Greg McCarroll]

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> At 13:50 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most
> > > the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies
> > > who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and
> > > installing CPAN modules is frowned on by the sysadmins and beyond the
> > > ability of most users.
> >
> >Much better argument.
> >
> >What about taint-safety?
> 
> All of our scripts must have "-T" and will do whatever is necessary to 
> clean up external data.
> 
> I see this as one of our big selling points - "our scripts don't allow 
> users to delete all your files".
> 

I would just like to disclaim this warranty. ;-)

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 15:51 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts
> > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt
> > Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we
> > should be able to do it too.
>
>i originally shared your viewpoint on this, but what changed my
>mind is the following scenario,
>
> some random perl monger, lets call them dave for ease has
> a really cool forums script. unfortunatly dave's script
> uses TT and dave hasn't time to replace the TT elements.
>
>do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it
>uses TT?
>
>this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
>collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
>denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
>just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.

I think our first priority is to replace Matt's scripts with the 
"idiot-installable" versions that we've been discussing.

If we have other, more complex, scripts available then I'd be very happy to 
see them in the archive, but they must be clearly marked as being more 
complex to use.

I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is 
that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really 
hits your cross-platform compatibility.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

RE: Strange Request

[Matthew Jones]

> do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it
> uses TT?
> 
> this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
> collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
> denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
> just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.

Surely there's nothing stopping you organising the archive in terms
dependencies on other modules.  Sort of - this will work on anything, but if
your system allows scripts to use TT, why not use *this*?

-- 
matt jones 

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 13:50 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most
> > the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies
> > who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and
> > installing CPAN modules is frowned on by the sysadmins and beyond the
> > ability of most users.
>
>Much better argument.
>
>What about taint-safety?

All of our scripts must have "-T" and will do whatever is necessary to 
clean up external data.

I see this as one of our big selling points - "our scripts don't allow 
users to delete all your files".

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Greg McCarroll]

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts 
> worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt 
> Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we 
> should be able to do it too.
> 

i originally shared your viewpoint on this, but what changed my
mind is the following scenario,

some random perl monger, lets call them dave for ease has
a really cool forums script. unfortunatly dave's script
uses TT and dave hasn't time to replace the TT elements.

do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it
uses TT?

this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the
collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond
denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that
just its core mission, and other scripts are welcome.

ho hum


-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Hodgkinson]

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most 
> the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies 
> who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and 
> installing CPAN modules is frowned on by the sysadmins and beyond the 
> ability of most users.

Much better argument.

What about taint-safety?


> 
> This may make the project a good deal less enjoyable, but I still think 
> it's very worth-while.
> 
> Dave...
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>   SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Data Munging with Perl 
> 

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 14:33 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 02:34:50PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> > >I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are 
> aimed
> > >at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
> > >sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
> > >replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...
> > I agree completely. I'd go as far as to suggest that these replacement
> > scripts should only use standard modules as well. The second that it
> > becomes just a bit harder to use our scripts than it is to use Matt's 
> we've
> > lost most of our potential audience.
>
>Any well written script we write will use CGI.pm. Unless we ship CGI.pm
>with the scripts, the fact that there are many many broken perl installs
>out there will mean such a script will be harder to use than matt wright's
>code.

You need to define a standard and stick to it. I suggest we write to Perl 
5.004_04 as it was a) pretty stable and b) the first to include CGI.pm.

We simply can't compete with Matt on backwards compatibility as his scripts 
all run on 4.036!

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 15:10 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>* Robert Shiels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
> > Subject: Re: Strange Request
> >
> >
> > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. 
> What I'd
> > > > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
> > There
> > > > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > > > rewrite them all?
> > >
> > > I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.
> >
> > I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are 
> aimed
> > at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
> > sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
> > replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...
> >
>
>if this project ever did get moving, you'd want to measure each
>script against categories such as ..
>
> Runs on Win32
> Runs on Linux
> Runs on Solaris
>
> Runs on any web server
>or  Runs only on apache
>
> Requires the following modules 
> blah
> blah

My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts 
worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt 
Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we 
should be able to do it too.

>and here we get back to the ROPE project as discussed before, where we
>could do a standard distribution of Apache/Mod Perl/Perl/Perl modules,
>with TT, XML::*, etc.,etc. already there

An interesting project, but IMHO it's a completely different one.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Freebies

[Dave Cross]

At 15:07 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >*why* it works, they just want it to work.
> > >
> > >  With the excellent documentation
> > >
> > >whether it's your stepping-stone to writing your own scripts or 
> whether you
> > >
> > >never want to get more in-depth than just typing in the path to your Perl
> > >executable.
> > >
> > >13 out of 14 people replied "yes".
> >
> > This gives an idea of the kind of audience you're aiming at with any
> > pudative "Anti-Matt" project.
>
>ok, they are not like us, but they are not wrong either, they just
>want something that works and is well documented. how you appeal
>to them is not the cleverness of the code, but with all of the
>attributes that ``commercial'' software competes on.

Agree completely. This is a potential audience that the "real" Perl 
community ignores completely. Installing extra modules, for example, is 
_not_ an option for them. If we continue to treat them like they aren't 
worth our time then it's no wonder they turn to people like Matt.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 13:05 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>"Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
> > Subject: Re: Strange Request
> >
> >
> > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. 
> What I'd
> > > > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
> > There
> > > > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > > > rewrite them all?
> > >
> > > I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.
> >
> > I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are 
> aimed
> > at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
> > sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
> > replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...
> >
> > /Robert
> >
> > [1]please ignore me if this isn't the case :)
>
>I'd argue that recent distros come with mod_perl out of the box and
>that should be used in such situations by default.

I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most 
the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies 
who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and 
installing CPAN modules is frowned on by the sysadmins and beyond the 
ability of most users.

This may make the project a good deal less enjoyable, but I still think 
it's very worth-while.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 14:02 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
>Subject: Re: Strange Request
>
> > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd
> > > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
>There
> > > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > > rewrite them all?
> >
> > I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.
>
>I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are aimed
>at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
>sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
>replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...

I agree completely. I'd go as far as to suggest that these replacement 
scripts should only use standard modules as well. The second that it 
becomes just a bit harder to use our scripts than it is to use Matt's we've 
lost most of our potential audience.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Mark Fowler]

> and here we get back to the ROPE project as discussed before, where we
> could do a standard distribution of Apache/Mod Perl/Perl/Perl modules,
> with TT, XML::*, etc.,etc. already there

Might not be a bad idea doing each of these in each of the technologies
anyhow.  It might prove a good way of showing how each of these work.

The biggest problem I have with using these 'branches' of perl is knowing
where to start.  If we had a collection of standard scripts that was
re-written each time in TT, XML::* or whatever, then I (or other clueless
monkeys like me) could work from what they know how to start, where to go,
etc, etc.

Later.

Mark.

-- 
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
   Name  => 'Mark Fowler',Title => 'Technology Developer'  ,
   Firm  => 'Profero Ltd',Web   => 'http://www.profero.com/'   ,
   Email => '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone => '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )

Re: Damian's Diary

[Greg McCarroll]

* Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> 
> Not some faceless American corporation, but London.pmers (with values of
> "London" including Belfast and wherever Piers lives).
> 

London.pm is not just a regional user group, a state of mind (liver?).
Even dha is a London.pm'er although he may not care to admit it ;-)

Greg 

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Strange Request

[Greg McCarroll]

* Robert Shiels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
> Subject: Re: Strange Request
> 
> 
> > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd
> > > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
> There
> > > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > > rewrite them all?
> >
> > I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.
> 
> I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are aimed
> at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
> sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
> replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...
> 

if this project ever did get moving, you'd want to measure each
script against categories such as .. 

Runs on Win32
Runs on Linux
Runs on Solaris

Runs on any web server
or  Runs only on apache

Requires the following modules 
blah
blah

and here we get back to the ROPE project as discussed before, where we
could do a standard distribution of Apache/Mod Perl/Perl/Perl modules,
with TT, XML::*, etc.,etc. already there





-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Freebies

[Greg McCarroll]

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >*why* it works, they just want it to work.
> >
> >  With the excellent documentation
> >
> >whether it's your stepping-stone to writing your own scripts or whether you
> >
> >never want to get more in-depth than just typing in the path to your Perl
> >executable.
> >
> >13 out of 14 people replied "yes".
> 
> This gives an idea of the kind of audience you're aiming at with any 
> pudative "Anti-Matt" project.

ok, they are not like us, but they are not wrong either, they just
want something that works and is well documented. how you appeal
to them is not the cleverness of the code, but with all of the
attributes that ``commercial'' software competes on. 

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Damian's Diary

[Philip Newton]

Dave Cross wrote:
> Damian's hectic world tour has now finished and he's had time 
> to update his online diary. He says a lot of nice things about
> us here 
> .

Not least of which, perhaps, is

The presence of Piers Cawley, Dave Cross, Greg McCarroll,
Léon Brocard, and Tony Bowden also meant that at that one
gathering I was able to spend time with the contributers of
over half my YAS grant. It was very humbling to think that
this community of clever and competent people had shown such
faith in me. 

Not some faceless American corporation, but London.pmers (with values of
"London" including Belfast and wherever Piers lives).

Cheers,
Philip

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Hodgkinson]

"Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> - Original Message -
> From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
> Subject: Re: Strange Request
> 
> 
> > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd
> > > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
> There
> > > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > > rewrite them all?
> >
> > I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.
> 
> I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are aimed
> at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
> sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
> replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...
> 
> /Robert
> 
> [1]please ignore me if this isn't the case :)

I'd argue that recent distros come with mod_perl out of the box and
that should be used in such situations by default.


-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Strange Request

[Robert Shiels]

- Original Message -
From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49
Subject: Re: Strange Request


> Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd
> > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts.
There
> > are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to
> > rewrite them all?
>
> I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.

I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are aimed
at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm
sure your solution will be much better, but I don't think it would be a
replacement for Matt's if the users can't run it...

/Robert

[1]please ignore me if this isn't the case :)

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Hodgkinson]

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd 
> like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts. There 
> are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to 
> rewrite them all?

I've done his "random text CGI" thingy as a mod_perl/TT drop-in.

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
  -

Re: Freebies

[Dave Cross]

At 13:02 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>On Tue 13 Mar, Dave Cross wrote:
>
> > Not clear which particular book you mean.
>
>The Cgi/Perl Cookbook by Craig Pratchett and Matthew Wright. John Wiley &
>Son. One of the current "reviews" on Amazon.com says:
>
>This is obviously a book that a lot of time and care went into, on the part
>of both authors. The CGI/Perl Cookbook has all of the best "goodies" from
>the excellent Matt's Script Archive website on its CD-ROM, and a chapter on
>each of the scripts carefully walks you through every line, explaining (in
>refreshingly non-technogeek language!) the programming theory behind each
>element and how the total script works. I found this very useful when I
>began writing my own Perl scripts.
>
>Matt's easy-to-modify CGI scripts are also great for people who don't care
>*why* it works, they just want it to work. With the excellent documentation
>Craig and Matt supply, these are as close to foolproof as CGI scripting
>("Aaagh! 500 Server Error!!") gets, and all 20 scripts covered in the book
>are the basic, useful kind that anyone handling websites will want to use
>sooner or later (guestbook, form mail, feedback, and a really well-designed
>web store.)
>
>Excellent value; this is the kind of book you'll keep and use for years,
>whether it's your stepping-stone to writing your own scripts or whether you
>never want to get more in-depth than just typing in the path to your Perl
>executable.
>
>Was this review helpful to you?
>
>13 out of 14 people replied "yes".

This gives an idea of the kind of audience you're aiming at with any 
pudative "Anti-Matt" project.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Redvers Davies]

> are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to 
> rewrite them all?

A week, I would guess given the resource available.  This would also make
an interesting project for someone to try and coordinate this effort and
arrange people into teams.

Hmm, Design, Modularity, Specify interfaces.  Farm the modules out to cartels
of beer swigging developers and let it happen.

Re: Strange Request

[Redvers Davies]

> No, but it's run by Matt. That's a list of CGI scripts written by loads of 
> people - there are even some old embarrassments of mine in there :-/

You know we are all scrambling to find it now ;)

Re: Freebies

[Roger Horne]

On Tue 13 Mar, Dave Cross wrote:
 
> Not clear which particular book you mean.

The Cgi/Perl Cookbook by Craig Pratchett and Matthew Wright. John Wiley &
Son. One of the current "reviews" on Amazon.com says:

This is obviously a book that a lot of time and care went into, on the part
of both authors. The CGI/Perl Cookbook has all of the best "goodies" from
the excellent Matt's Script Archive website on its CD-ROM, and a chapter on
each of the scripts carefully walks you through every line, explaining (in
refreshingly non-technogeek language!) the programming theory behind each
element and how the total script works. I found this very useful when I
began writing my own Perl scripts.

Matt's easy-to-modify CGI scripts are also great for people who don't care
*why* it works, they just want it to work. With the excellent documentation
Craig and Matt supply, these are as close to foolproof as CGI scripting
("Aaagh! 500 Server Error!!") gets, and all 20 scripts covered in the book
are the basic, useful kind that anyone handling websites will want to use
sooner or later (guestbook, form mail, feedback, and a really well-designed
web store.)

Excellent value; this is the kind of book you'll keep and use for years,
whether it's your stepping-stone to writing your own scripts or whether you
never want to get more in-depth than just typing in the path to your Perl
executable.

Was this review helpful to you?

13 out of 14 people replied "yes".


Roger
-- 
Roger Horne
11 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3QB
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hrothgar.co.uk/

Re: Freebies

[Dave Cross]

At 12:15 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>On Tue 13 Mar, Dave Cross wrote:
> >
> > Postman just bought a review copy of Lincoln Stein's "Network Programming
> > with Perl". This is good news as it seems that Addison Wesley have now 
> seen
> > that giving freebie copies to Perl Monger groups is a Good Thing.
>
>Since you only get one copy of each of these books, would it be a good idea
>to do what the publishers presumably want you to do, ie review them on the
>list ... ?

Not a bad idea. Unfortunately, it's currently hovering at about item number 
300 on my "Things to do (urgent)" list :(

>Wiley might even be foolish enough to send you a copy of *that* book to
>review ...

Not clear which particular book you mean.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Leo Lapworth]

> And if you're interested in Matt as a person (and who wouldn't be?) try:
> 
> 

http://www.mattwright.com/msa.html

"I always have lots of stuff in the works, but most of it only gets 
about halfway finished before I get bored and give up. That's the way I work. :) "

- explains a lot.

Leo

Re: Freebies

[Roger Horne]

On Tue 13 Mar, Dave Cross wrote:
> 
> Postman just bought a review copy of Lincoln Stein's "Network Programming 
> with Perl". This is good news as it seems that Addison Wesley have now seen 
> that giving freebie copies to Perl Monger groups is a Good Thing.

Since you only get one copy of each of these books, would it be a good idea
to do what the publishers presumably want you to do, ie review them on the
list ... ?

Wiley might even be foolish enough to send you a copy of *that* book to
review ... 

Roger
-- 
Roger Horne
11 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3QB
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hrothgar.co.uk/

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 12:03 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>At 10:40 13/03/01, you wrote:
>>I guess the problem is that you could create an archive of CGI programs
>>written by the best Perl programmers in the world but people would _still_
>>find Matt's scripts first.
>
>is this Matt's script archive?
>
>http://www.cgi.resourceindex.com/

No, but it's run by Matt. That's a list of CGI scripts written by loads of 
people - there are even some old embarrassments of mine in there :-/

>That is what I found when I googled for 'web based diary perl'...

But if you google for 'matts script archive' you get:



And if you're interested in Matt as a person (and who wouldn't be?) try:



Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Natalie Ford]

At 10:40 13/03/01, you wrote:
>I guess the problem is that you could create an archive of CGI programs
>written by the best Perl programmers in the world but people would _still_
>find Matt's scripts first.

is this Matt's script archive?

http://www.cgi.resourceindex.com/

That is what I found when I googled for 'web based diary perl'...

Natalie

Re: Strange Request

[Philip Newton]

Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> Maybe we need to sponsor Matt Wright? The inverse of the 
> Damian sponsorship, we would cover whatever revenue he gets
> from his scripts in return for him shutting all the sites
> down for a year, and redirecting everyone somewhere else.
> What do you reckon? Sponsor Matt to not be involved 
> with Perl for a year?

I thought Matt gives away the scripts for free, so what revenue is involved
probably comes from banner ads. And from what I heard, Matt wrote those
scripts several years ago and isn't doing much on them these days, so paying
him to "not be involved with Perl" probably won't change what he's doing. Or
has he produced something new recently? (Too lazy to check.)

For all I know, he might even be a decent Perl programmer now, but too lazy
or apathetic to go and update all of his scripts. Or he might be a Java
programmer now and say "here are some scripts I wrote some time ago; you're
free to use them on an as-is basis but I'm not doing any maintenance on them
as I've moved on".

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Re: Freebies

[Dave Cross]

At 11:28 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 11:27:08AM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> > At 12:15 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> >
> > >By the way, Dave, did Addison Wesley contact you about this or vice
> > >versa? I'm wondering if O'Reilly and others are sending books to Perl
> > >monger groups anyway and they just vanish unmentioned with the maintainer
> > >of Vienna.pm...
> >
> > I got an email via the Perl Monger Group Leaders mailing list.
>
>Odd.  I didn't get anything from them.  

Yep. I just checked and that's definitely where it came from. I've 
forwarded you a copy.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

RE: Strange Request

[Clarke, Darren]

Title: RE: Strange Request





> > > That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt.


> >I thought Selena was female. Oh well.


> Nope. He's a bloke called Eric.


So's my dad - useful huh?


Darren Clarke

RE: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 11:29 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> > That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt.
>
>I thought Selena was female. Oh well.

Nope. He's a bloke called Eric.





-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Freebies

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 11:27:08AM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> At 12:15 13/03/2001, you wrote:
> 
> >By the way, Dave, did Addison Wesley contact you about this or vice
> >versa? I'm wondering if O'Reilly and others are sending books to Perl
> >monger groups anyway and they just vanish unmentioned with the maintainer
> >of Vienna.pm...
> 
> I got an email via the Perl Monger Group Leaders mailing list.

Odd.  I didn't get anything from them.  

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

RE: Strange Request

[Jonathan Peterson]

> That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt.

I thought Selena was female. Oh well.

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 11:13 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>At 10:58 13/03/2001 +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>
>>all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples.
>>forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc.
>
>Isn't this what Extropia tried to do ? (www.extropia.com)
>
>Why did this not get picked up, is it just to complicated ?

That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Freebies

[Dave Cross]

At 12:15 13/03/2001, you wrote:

>Dave Cross, Lord and Master of London.pm, thus wrote:
>
> >Postman just bought a review copy of Lincoln Stein's "Network Programming
> >with Perl". This is good news as it seems that Addison Wesley have now seen
> >that giving freebie copies to Perl Monger groups is a Good Thing.
> >
> >I'll be giving it away at the next meeting, which is on Thursday 5th April.
> >IIRC we'd volunteered mstevens to try and book us the downstairs bar in the
> >Cittie of Yorke.
>
>... which I hope to be able to attend. A weekend in London seems like
>a good idea, to make up the mind whether to break the promise to settle
>in Vienna for good.

We look forward to seeing you.

>By the way, Dave, did Addison Wesley contact you about this or vice
>versa? I'm wondering if O'Reilly and others are sending books to Perl
>monger groups anyway and they just vanish unmentioned with the maintainer
>of Vienna.pm...

I got an email via the Perl Monger Group Leaders mailing list.

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Simon Wilcox]

At 10:58 13/03/2001 +, Greg McCarroll wrote:

[snip]


>all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples.
>forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc.

Isn't this what Extropia tried to do ? (www.extropia.com)

Why did this not get picked up, is it just to complicated ?

Simon.

Re: Strange Request

[Dave Cross]

At 10:56 13/03/2001, you wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with
> > the problem at source - perl certification
> >
> > *duck*
> >
> > having said in another email how there were no resources to deal with this
> > problem, there is a near miss in the perl cookbook, however to tackle
> > the problem directly, maybe ORA need to commission a Perl CGI Cookbook.
> >
> > all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples.
> > forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc.
>
>Maybe we should join the many people who've had a go at this...
>
>setup a CVS repository on penderel, get on with it.

I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd 
like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts. There 
are  15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to 
rewrite them all?

Dave...



-- 
  SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Data Munging with Perl 

Re: Strange Request

[Struan Donald]

* at 13/03 10:56 + Michael Stevens said:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with 
> > the problem at source - perl certification 
> > 
> > *duck*
> > 
> > having said in another email how there were no resources to deal with this
> > problem, there is a near miss in the perl cookbook, however to tackle
> > the problem directly, maybe ORA need to commission a Perl CGI Cookbook.
> > 
> > all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples.
> > forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc.
> 
> Maybe we should join the many people who've had a go at this...
> 
> setup a CVS repository on penderel, get on with it.

was that the sound of someone volunteering?

struan

Re: DJ jabbers on the O'Reilly Network

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:10:39AM +, Michael Stevens wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:18:53PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> > You _do_ realise that I've now put the trademark notice on all of the 
> > london.pm web pages :)
> 
> Anyone know if we could ACTUALLY trademark this?

I believe we could.  It costs something like 400 quid to do the search and
register it and stuff.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

Re: Strange Request

[Struan Donald]

* at 13/03 10:43 - Jonathan Peterson said:
> 
> > There's a marketing battle that needs to be fought first. We
> > need, somehow,
> > to ensure that newbie CGI programmers read criticisms of
> > Matt's scripts
> > _before_ they find Matt's Script Archive. And I don't know
> > how you're going
> > to undo five years of misinformation and achieve that.
> 
> Maybe we need to sponsor Matt Wright? The inverse of the Damian sponsorship,
> we would cover whatever revenue he gets from his scripts in return for him
> shutting all the sites down for a year, and redirecting everyone somewhere
> else. What do you reckon? Sponsor Matt to not be involved with Perl for a
> year?

couldn't we just raise enough cash to send him on a decent perl
training course? that way he might re-write his stuff.

although the sheer twistedness of the above does appeal :)

struan

Re: Strange Request

[David Cantrell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:08:52AM -, Miss Barbell wrote:

> Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50
> cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by Matt Wright, with a
> CD including many scripts from his site. What made even more amused was that
> there was a whacking great recommendation to buy it, blazoned across the
> top, from the one and only Randal Schwartz. Hm

Yeees.  I don't think you're meant to mention that in polite society :-)

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

This is a signature.  There are many like it but this one is mine.

** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important **

 PGP signature

Re: DJ jabbers on the O'Reilly Network

[Greg McCarroll]

* Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:37:12AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:18:53PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > > You _do_ realise that I've now put the trademark notice on all of the 
> > > > london.pm web pages :)
> > > Anyone know if we could ACTUALLY trademark this?
> > trademarking the trademarking of a perl mongers website? 
> Trademarking beer in connection with perl, silly.
> 

oh sorry, that makes perfect sense! god, i'm glad i'm away from
you lot for a bit longer this month, so i can regain some sanity.



-- 
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net