On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:34:06AM -, dcross - David Cross wrote: * There are currently 100 copies in Europe. * Another (larger) shipment from Manning ended up in Singapore somehow! They will return at some point in the next week. * The large Charing Cross Road bookshops (Foyles, Blackwells, Waterstones) should all have 3 or 4 copies now. * Amazon had (we think) 10 copies. Don't know how many they've sold. There are two copies here. I *think* they both came from amazon. Michael
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:24:46PM +, Richard Clamp wrote: I think Mr Clamp has been doing initial development on this, but has not yet released his code. Okay, it's pre pre alpha, it does nothing, and it's not even an very good way of doing the nothing it does. Perhaps a sourceforge project to allow open collaboration? :) Michael
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:29:45PM +, Richard Clamp wrote: Or the london.pm server, on which we could do straight cvs, or even install the lumbering beast that is sourceforge. I nominate dadadodo as the pumpking for this. I think he should collaborate with dipsy. Michael
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 01:31:42PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote: Class::DBI looks groovy. Does anyone know why it might not be? Doesn't work in 5.004_04. This may be a problem in some situations. Michael
We've been talking about t-shirts on irc, and I think we should try to get some ideas together. Some thoughts to start you off: Hash Bang Perl Pony::Pony PIMB (we've done this one) ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US Michael  disclaimer in advance: unofficial ideas, not a project of the london perl mongers group, not endorsed by anyone ever. I promise not to be organised in any way, and make no commitment whatsoever.
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 12:43:34PM +, Paul Mison wrote: On 21/02/2001 at 12:26 +, Michael Stevens wrote: ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US and they were disposable. This sort of meme just does the rounds too rapidly. I mean, how much would you laugh at someone wearing a 'I am Mahir, Kiss Me Now' or whatever it was tshirt now? You've got it! We need dissolving t-shirts! Michael
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 12:57:00PM +, Dave Thorn wrote: On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 12:53:55PM +, Struan Donald wrote: surely just t-shirts with editable text? T-shirts with a velcro strip and a bad of letters that stick. Available now at GAP dave, no I haven't been in there Now if someone would just invent print-on lcd panels... Michael
amazon uk have started shipping data munging with perl. I have my copy. Michael
Last night I cunningly managed to get off the tube at stratford, get halfway out of the station, and then realise I don't actually live in Stratford. Michael
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:27:17AM +, David Cantrell wrote: On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 05:43:27AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: I hope that everyone who turned up last night had a good time - I certainly did (that may, of course, have something to do with the fact that I was drinking for the first time for a month). I'd be interested in any opinions that people had about the venue as I'm still looking for a new home for our social meetings. I wasn't impressed. It suffered from all the same problems as PO, but was even noisier. I'm going to find out if we can have the upstairs bar of the Albemarle on Dover St. It's sufficiently small that we should be able to have it to ourselves, but sufficiently large that we won't be crowded. They do good beer and I'm fairly certain they do food in the evenings. And the TVRs weren't cheap. Somewhere with decently priced food would be good. Michael
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 12:34:15PM +, Robin Houston wrote: what is it with ponys? I've wondered that too. Seems to be a #perl obsession... purl pony [12:39] [purl] pony is replyGimme a Pony! Pony! Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Pony Pony Pony! Michael
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 12:25:09PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote: No, I disagree. This is like a mechanic saying "You really oughtn't to change your own oil, oil is very important, if you get it wrong you could really damage your engine, that sort of thing should be left to a qualified mechanic". It's complete crap. Changing the oil in car is not that hard. Until recently, most car owners would expect to do it themselves, along with changing spark plugs and various other tasks. My problem with some of the CGI stuff is that it sounds like the equivalent of a mechanic saying "well, when changing oil, it's not that important what you put in - any oily liquid will work". You might happen to end up with a car that runs, but it's still not the advice people should be giving out... Michael  I Am Not A Mechanic. if this is not actually a silly idea, imagine I suggested something else that is.
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:16:06AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: Benjamin Holzman [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:57:20AM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote: * Meaning, nobody's really a complete idiot and we'd seem just as dumb * if we called brain surgery tech support, new mother tech support, or * even gardening tech support. *True, but there aren't many people who will assume that they can perform *brain surgery just because they successfully applied a band-aid to a paper *cut the week before. True, but I don't think anyone is going to die from writing crappy CGIs v. hacking at someones grey cells with a scalpel. Gardening tech support is perhaps a better example. Not sure. I've managed to keep pot plants alive but I don't go round thinking I'm a gardener. Michael
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:33:24AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *My problem with some of the CGI stuff is that it sounds like the *equivalent of a mechanic saying "well, when changing oil, it's not *that important what you put in - any oily liquid will work". You could try corn syrup...once. :) "Corn syrup" still sounds like something that would taste of wheat. I was talking to someone on a talker about this today, but they said they hadn't found anything in the UK yet that included it, so I have no reference whatsoever for what it is, apart from the fact I'm told it's sugary. (apparently some countries put it in cola). (pedantry: There *are* applications where bad programming could kill. I don't think any of us work in them, but I'm pretty sure they exist.) Michael
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:28:37AM +, Neil Ford wrote: I can't get onto any of rhizomatic.net. Is anyone else having problems? Michael we're all there fine in actuall fact as I type this you've just appeared :-) Having now got on I can state the problem was a complete inability to get rhizomatic dns. Michael
I can't get onto any of rhizomatic.net. Is anyone else having problems? Michael
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:35:47AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: Ahem. Didn't they learn _anything_ from Microsoft? IRC's IP, anyone? london.rhizomatic.net is also www.astray.com is 188.8.131.52
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 01:02:03PM -, Robert Shiels wrote: Well, publishing username/passwords to everyone who needs them is trickey, and getting people to remember them is also hard. For example, I took family photos, I want the whole family to look at them, and anyone else who they give the link to, but my mum has enough trouble connecting to the internet without remembering new usernames and passwords. You could give out urls with the usernames and passwords in? Michael
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 08:35:10AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: Data Munging with Perl by David Cross Amazon.com Sales Rank: 760 Blimey, how did that happen? Yesterday it was 87,867! Now if they'd just actually send me the copy I ordered... (I think they said 3-5 weeks) Michael
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 02:24:08PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote: Michael Stevens wrote: You could give out urls with the usernames and passwords in? Were you thinking of http://username:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/pics/drunkenperlmongers.jpg ? No such thing; RTFRFC for more info. Being somewhat practical, they do tend to work. Michael
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 08:52:02AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: Now if they'd just actually send me the copy I ordered... (I think they said 3-5 weeks) Did you order it from amazon.co.uk? amazon.com have it stock and are sending it out now. It'll be another couple of weeks before it hits the amazon.co.uk warehouse. Yeah - amazon.co.uk. It's part of a larger order and I'm probably going to just wait until it all ships... Michael
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 11:18:24PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: Simon Wistow sent the following bits through the ether: Conveniently close to Cynthia's Cyberbar. No, please god, no! Can't we just try and forget this excuse for a bar? But the mirrors! Don't forget the mirrors!
It's oh so quiet. After recent activity this is somewhat disconcerting. Michael
On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 12:04:54PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: It's oh so quiet. After recent activity this is somewhat disconcerting. everyone is probably reading up on ruby in preparation for it taking over the world Surely you mean python? (I kinda like python) Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:53:00PM +, Mark Fowler wrote: I like my .emacs file. It sets nice fonts and colours, and sets the editing mode and wrapping mode of choice ;-) I'm sure it can do more... 1) Where do I find handy things to put into my .emacs file on the web? 2) Got any nice bits of your .emacs file to share? Note that (shock, horror) I can't program lisp properly (duh, I program perl) so that I may sound stupid when it comes to these things. The real trick is trying to write something portable between emacs and xemacs. Anyway... ;; inhibit annoying messages (setq inhibit-startup-echo-area-message t) (setq inhibit-startup-message t) ;; set general defaults (setq tab-width 2) (setq indent-tabs-mode nil) (setq initial-major-mode 'text-mode) (setq default-major-mode 'text-mode) ;; add my libraries to load-path (setq load-path (append (list (expand-file-name "~michaels/etc/emacs")) load-path)) p4.el available from http://www.dsmit.com/p4/ is kinda nice if you're working with perforce. Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:53:00PM +, Mark Fowler wrote: I like my .emacs file. It sets nice fonts and colours, and sets the editing mode and wrapping mode of choice ;-) I'm sure it can do more... 1) Where do I find handy things to put into my .emacs file on the web? 2) Got any nice bits of your .emacs file to share? Note that (shock, horror) I can't program lisp properly (duh, I program perl) so that I may sound stupid when it comes to these things. ;; working for me to get unix line endings on a win32 system (set-default-coding-systems 'undecided-unix) ;; I like auto-fill when I'm editing text. usually (add-hook 'text-mode-hook 'auto-fill-mode) ;; show me the region selected right now (setq transient-mark-mode t) Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:52:37AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: O'Reilly have launched a new site discussing LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, Perl/Python/PHP) web development. Most of the current content seems to be links to existing O'Reilly Network content (e.g. perl.com), but it's a interesting start. And good to see the term being given credence by someone like O'Reilly. Dave... [who is glad he still has the lampmagic domains!] And the url is? Michael (I had a quick look at ora.com but I couldn't see anything obvious)
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 02:30:07PM -, Robert Shiels wrote: I just wanted to ask a brief question about passwords. I have access to about 10 SAP systems in my work at the moment, and all of them require a password, and these passwords all expire after 60 days. This will happen at random times depending on when I actually try to logon. So I have the potential of having 10 different passwords. And I get locked out of the system after 3 bad password tries (as sysadmin I can unlock myself, but it's a pain, and also as sysadmin, I need to unlock other people all the time). My question is, Why is automatic password expiry a good idea? It's a pain, and encourages bad password management. I'll probably log onto each system every 60 days and set them all to the same one. Not that I necessarily agree with what this says, it's definately interesting and worth thinking about: Security and Human Factors http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20001126.html Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 02:41:38PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: i assume odd beer is a typo and you mean't odd beers, i.e. an odd number of beers ( i've also decided that 1 is not an odd number ) seriously, i'm sure everyone would welcome you with open arms We are perl. you will be assimiliated. Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:53:00PM +, Mark Fowler wrote: I like my .emacs file. It sets nice fonts and colours, and sets the editing mode and wrapping mode of choice ;-) I'm sure it can do more... 1) Where do I find handy things to put into my .emacs file on the web? 2) Got any nice bits of your .emacs file to share? Note that (shock, horror) I can't program lisp properly (duh, I program perl) so that I may sound stupid when it comes to these things. I have a massive emacs setup of multi-pleasure that's been mouldering for about two-three years. Maybe I should resurrect it. Michael
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:31:30PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: I got the following email in response to my TT2 article. I know nothing about EmbPerl so I can't really answer these points. Does anyone who has used EmbPerl have any ammo that I can use in my reply? Embperl is entirely Apache and web based, which is good for some things and bad for some things, like having the template wotsit work orthogonally to everything else. It's definately entirely web based, but I have cron jobs using embperl to generate html email that goes to various people without ever going near apache... Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:18:06AM +, Greg Cope wrote: How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian, by someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently, as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good with solaris? (And, myself, I'd recommend the PC for some situations, and the Solaris box for others). My main problem with the PC architecture is that you can do a lot by carefully picking a good manufacturer, but it's still fundamentally not as solid and consistent as sun stuff, IMHO. I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your money? Michael  OS changed on the grounds I feel that Redhat ships something more optimised towards desktop use, whereas I feel Debian and Solaris are both more suited for servers. Would this still hold for a RedDrat system with all the X stuff and other unncessary stuff removed ? And if not - what else do you you think is different ? I've a small shell script that does quite a bit of rpm -e (remove) on X stuff / other druff that redhat installs by default - it would be nice if they included a stripped down install class in their default install - which left you with a basic machine IMHO the main significance here is in the default install. You can fiddle around with anything if you want and make it vaguely sensible as a server. Redhat as default is not very well setup to use as a server on the internet (I feel). Debian I think is a lot better as shipped, as is Solaris, mostly on the grounds they're less prone to installing irrelevant crap. Michael  My solaris admin experience is almost completely nonexistent, but I'd drawing on my experience as a user of solaris systems.
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:19:02AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:07:02AM +, Michael Stevens typed: I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your money? Dell offer this on some of their servers. IMHO this is always a waste of money - they don't provide anything that you couldn't do yourself by having a stock of spare parts and someone competent on call. I don't really like most big name linux stuff, because all they seem to support is Redhat, and while I can completely understand their reasons, I find it almost impossible to make a Redhat system into something that I like. Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:30:03AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:23:26AM +, Michael Stevens typed: On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:19:02AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: Dell offer this on some of their servers. IMHO this is always a waste of money - they don't provide anything that you couldn't do yourself by having a stock of spare parts and someone competent on call. I don't really like most big name linux stuff, because all they seem to support is Redhat, and while I can completely understand their reasons, I find it almost impossible to make a Redhat system into something that I like. Agreed entirely. I was thinking purely of hardware support; software support IME is always and everywhere a complete waste of time and money. And then people wonder why I like open source... I've heard rumours that software support can be useful, but not yet encountered such a thing. Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:30:28AM +, Struan Donald wrote: on the other hand kickstart files aren't that tricky to write and you can then set up the box in a sensible way (or something approaching that) and it's very easy to set up a chunk of boxes the same. of course you a box to put the kcikstart stuff on (assuming network install...) Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff I didn't know about? If it is just a solaris thing, I was holding up solaris boxes as being GOOD because they don't come with much stuff installed. For servers, I see this as a desirable feature. One of these days I must play with the FAI (fully automatic installation) stuff for debian. Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:39:17AM +, Struan Donald wrote: One of these days I must play with the FAI (fully automatic installation) stuff for debian. kickstart is (i assume) teh redhat equiv of FAI. or at least it is if FAI is stick floppy in system, create symlink in some magic format i can't quite remember on kickstart server and reboot box. go and make beverage of choice, come back to newly installed box. They sound similiar. Google reveals that what I was thinking of was Jumpstart, which is the solaris approach to all this. I think the FAI stuff will work with remote boot roms on the network cards if you want to do that, too. I don't have any info but I think FAI is fairly immature. I just prefer a small system which makes it easy to install what you want rather than a big one where you have to remove stuff. I dunno. Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:16:52PM +, Steve Mynott wrote: There's very little off-topic on this list :) Kickstart is RedHat http://wwwcache.ja.net/dev/kickstart/KickStart-HOWTO.html Jumpstart is Solaris Both are automated install procedures. Yes. I have learnt. If it is just a solaris thing, I was holding up solaris boxes as being GOOD because they don't come with much stuff installed. For servers, I see this as a desirable feature. Whatever system I use (linux or solaris) I find they come with far too much stuff installed. Solaris is a bad offender as well with Thai X Windows fonts and that CDE junk as well. No I don't want power management or true-type fonts on a server thank you Mr Joy. My only install of solaris has been on a 486, but IIRC you get a decent amount of flexibility over what does, and does not, go in. Any system, irrespective of OS or distribution, I tend to totally strip down out of all junk. Binary package managers  tend to help a lot with this (yes RPM can be good especially the -e flag). This is what the Hells Angels did with their Harleys, strip them ("chop") down the bare essentials before starting work. I then customise them by installing all the real GNU programs (and checking all the configuration options before building) you need like emacs, rcs, gcc, perl etc (and the DJB stuff) under /usr/local and killing that evil inetd program (a nice simple way of securing your system). If you follow this then you should be able to make a useable UNIX system from any system (maybe even SCO if you were that insane). This is reminding me of our talk of the ROPE thing - drop in packages that turn any system into something usable for a particular application.  My main gripe with *BSD is lack of binary package management It's been a while since I BSD'd much, but I definately remember installing binary packages for many things on OpenBSD. Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:40:13AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: *Oh, agreed entirely. The key thing is that nobody _expects_ a professional *support service, so they're less disappointed when it doesn't happen. I don't think this is true for the great majority of software end-users out there. They expect documentation and some sort of answer/FAQ whatnot to their questions and those that don't have the bare minimum will probably fail in the public arena. Can anyone point to actual studies of the "we took some end users, and found they wanted FOO amounts of documentation". And, for completeness, "we took some end users, looked at what they were actually using, and then looked at how much documentation was available for those products"? Michael
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:00AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *I personally would have just as little faith in Solaris run by someone *who didn't know what they were doing as I would in Redhat run by *someone who didn't know what they were doing. I would have more faith in Solaris. On an acadmeic network, no firewalls, we had user workstations that pretty much lived on their own and at the mercy of their users. One day, one of the AI profs installed RedHat after most of us had left the computing dept...we heard that someone hacked into said linux box and sniffed the entire dept. passwords. Were the solaris boxes setup by the same people who setup the redhat boxes tho, or were two different people adminning them? The scenario I'm guessing is: a) solaris workstations setup by sysadmin, left on their own. users don't have root. b) redhat box setup by AI prof, left on own. users don't have root. But that's just my guess from common practice at the university I've attended. If this *is* the case, and the sysadmins have more experience than the AI prof, the two cases aren't comparable, because they don't both not know what they're doing. perhaps Linux gives people a sense of adventure or something, but Solaris in the last few years has become quite good at running well in spite of the chimps at the keyboard. I'm working on the theory that everybody gets root exploits. Therefore, no matter what it is, if you don't patch it for 6 months / a year, it'll be exploitable. We need a decent way to work out the difference between "box A is more hackable than box B", and "box A is more likely to get hacked than box B, due the type of exploits people tend to try". I suspect without detailed evidence skr1pt k1dd1es are more likely to go for redhat. Redhat is perhaps more likely to have security bugs spotted due to (I'm guessing here), more installations in the world. Perhaps not. I certainly have a *perception* more security issues are found in redhat than in most other linux and unix (eg solaris) distributions. And can't we have an discussion about which OS is best without bashing a particular one all time?  *How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian, by *someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently, *as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good *with solaris? I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very interested to run and compare the results. I'm not interested in performance numbers. No. I like. I *am* interested in performance numbers, but not right now. And I'm fairly sure big sun boxes go significantly bigger and better than big pcs. This is one of the advantages of Sun. More interesting would be stuff like "redhat gets x security problems per year, solaris has y problems", "we see x exploit attempts specific to redhat, y specific to solaris", "on this metric of well-adminstered-ness, these sets of sun boxes were found to have these numbers. this other set of redhat boxes were found to have these other numbers". I suspect a number of these issues could be found by someone reading bugtraq more carefully than I do - I remember some of these types of stats being discussed. Michael  Ok, yes, most of us suck here when the other OS is windows.
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff *I didn't know about? Jumpstart. yes, I found that out, my memory sucks.
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:04:07PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:00AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote: Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: I take that post back. I don't think it would be productive to continue the discussion. Michael
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 06:02:25PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dreamweaver (I know, don't ask) nicely escapes the spaces to %20 but when I try and download these, the %20 appears in the Netscape file save as box instead of spaces. Dreamweaver is by far the best GUI html development tool I'm aware of. Michael
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 11:09:15AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pretty much ! Having started the web site project here without much knowledge of developing websites (having mostly been doing corporate network support before that) I allowed the designer to choose the tools. I chose apache/mod_perl for the backend because I wanted to learn more about perl apache. Perhaps not the best rationale but hey, it's my project :-) We now have a site with lots of html files full of dreamweaver tags which are very easy to mess up with a text editor so we tend to stick to DW and keep the hand editing to a minimum. Having learned LOTS in the last year, we are planning to rebuild the site to separate the templates from the content because content management is becoming a pain. Naturally we will be doing this with perl. So - Dreamweaver is a good gui editor but it generates files which are difficult to maintain. It is good for those who are not technically minded but probably not the best choice if you have technical skills available. We will ditch DW in the new version of the site. I think there's a lot of potential for manipulating dreamweaver's markup and file structures from perl. I've been able to write CGI scripts that do stuff like. print STDOUT get_library_component('componentname'); and fetch and include stuff from dreamweaver at the appropriate place. I think there's a lot of potential in this sort of approach but I've not heard of anyone exploiting it. Michael __ This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is addressed and is not intended to be relied upon by any person without subsequent written confirmation of its contents. Accordingly, our company disclaim all responsibility and accept no liability (including in negligence) for the consequences for any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information prior to the receipt by those persons of subsequent written confirmation. If you have received this E-mail message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone. Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of this E-mail message is strictly prohibited. use Std::Disclaimer::Moan; my $moan = new Std::Disclaimer::Moan; $moan-mail('[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:32:46PM -, Matthews Simon wrote: As someone who's been using templates and perl to do web sites since January 96 I can see both sides of the argument. We (perl people) are all much happier with the idea of building pages from bits it appeals to our laziness. There are however end users to consider. Much as I have tried I cannot get the marketing droids to use vim and templates. They seem to have a real problem with this. Our solution to this has been to write some perl code to convert Word documents (marketers tool of choice) into Template::Toolkit templates that we use internally. This makes us all happy :-) I would actually be interested to hear from someone on the Dreamweaver side of this argument... Anyone? Michael
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:43:47PM -, Mark Kitching wrote: I would actually be interested to hear from someone on the Dreamweaver side of this argument... Anyone? Michael I'd love to but the last time I spoke about Dreamweaver with Dave Cross around it turned into a LOOONG lunchtime. I'm not seeing the flaw yet... Michael
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 08:20:28PM +, Dave Cross wrote: From the discussion on IRC, it seems that Leon's summary mail has opened a bit of a can of worms. There are a number of people who don't like the idea of a publically advertised archive of this mailing list. For the record, I don't like the idea.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 11:32:58AM +, Andy Wardley wrote: There was a moral in this story but I forgot it in the process of rambling on. Probably something about munging Reply-To, or putting all middle management up against a wall and shooting them (which ICL did a short while later). Was this simple yet violent process found to be of benefit to the company? michael
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:35:17PM -, Robert Shiels wrote: Let's be kind to the poor Windows users, encouraging them with the lure of free powerful software; once they get a taste for it they'll be begging you to help them get Linux installed as a dual boot on their home machines, then as they get used to it and driver support gets better they'll find themselves booting Linux more than Windows, then their conversion away from the dark side will be complete :-) I think the appropriate attitude is to NOT try to convert people, except possibly in a slightly silly "muh, you must use linux for everything" way that I personally don't take too seriously. We need to just get on with using linux, and other sensible stuff, and IF PEOPLE ASK QUESTIONS then we can tell them about it. But we shouldn't try to promote it as what they want, because invariably they start going "aargh, it' doesn't have all the shiny windows features, it must suck, and you said it was good", whereas if they get interested in it themselves, and come to you, you've made no promises so they can't be dissappointed. OTOH, that doesn't help us much with the desirable goal of getting unix used more in the workplace. I dunno. Michael
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:46:13PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On or about Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:43:46PM +, Michael Stevens typed: We need to just get on with using linux, and other sensible stuff, and IF PEOPLE ASK QUESTIONS then we can tell them about it. But we shouldn't try to promote it as what they want, because invariably they start going "aargh, it' doesn't have all the shiny windows features, it must suck, and you said it was good", whereas if they get interested in it themselves, and come to you, you've made no promises so they can't be dissappointed. OTOH, that doesn't help us much with the desirable goal of getting unix used more in the workplace. I dunno. I think it's just like proactive evangelism vs "living a good life" - when your box hasn't crashed six times today, and it's running a clone of a production web site faster than the live box, and it's doing all the monitoring for the company, and... people start to say "ooh, how can I get some of that". This is a reaction that hitting them over the head with Debian CDs rarely engenders (though it's fun anyway). I was actually thinking religion here as the analogy... Anyway, we seem to be in furious agreement. Michael
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:07:38PM -0600, Paul Makepeace wrote: On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 01:47:59PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote: Jon, who thinks Windows workstation connected to *nix machine running samba is the prefered development environment. Aye aye. Windows UI is much nicer than linux's (right now) and linux doesn't have a decent browser which is a serious handicap. My mileage varies. Although you're right about the browser. Michael
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 02:11:02PM -0600, Paul Makepeace wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:38:31PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: la la la la *has hands over ears* i cant here you, la la la la The issue of millions-of-CCs needs to be addressed by anyone putting together a pro-reply-to: sender argument. Using procmail is *not* the right answer, neither is burdening the user with constantly editing the outgoing To: Cc: *every fscking email*. I just use the list reply feature in my MUA. Michael
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 10:26:18AM +, James O'Sullivan wrote: On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 08:47:35AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: Contracts _should_ say that the client pays for changes to what he originally said he wanted. Sometimes they do. It's quite rare, in my experience, for this payment actually to be demanded. (Usually some excuse along the lines of "it's a big customer and we don't want to annoy them".) This XP approach seems to require a lot more firmness I've also found a lot of customers are absolute *geniuses* at fudging the issue of what they did and didn't agree to, no matter how specific you attempt to be. All changes no matter how small should be passed through a change control process, normally put in place by the project manager assigned to that specific job. A change control document will normally be produced which will detail what the client wants, how much it will cost and what the effects are on the project timeline. This will need to be read and physically signed off by the client before any work is undertaken. a) you need to be able to persuade management this is a good idea b) you need to get someone writing specs who is actually able to be specific. And you need to have some way of dealing with a client who will refuse to pay until you implement something that they say is contained within the spec, and you don't. Despite the fact you're both reading the same spec. From memories of my last job, both of these can be a problem. Michael
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:52:08PM +, DJ Adams wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:47:03PM +, Andy Wardley wrote: So without wishing to start another holy war, is it possible to change too late ;) the mailing list configuration to have a more sensible default Reply-to? No no! Please no! holy war Why surely the most sensible reply-to is no reply-to at all... /holy war
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:32:58PM +, DJ Adams wrote: Hi folks Am I going mad or is there no way I can start my fav client program PuTTY and specify a saved 'session' directly with a switch? (i.e. I can specify a hostname, but I _want_ to specify a session name - to have my colours / fonts etc) And does anyone know how to get putty to save settings like they key for backspace, etc, rather than my having to set them every time I start it? Michael
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:33:34PM +, Simon Wistow wrote: Greg McCarroll wrote: reply-to having the address of the sender is the right thing, it means when you reply to a message you reply to author of that message, when you reply-all you reply to all No. When you reply-all it replies to the sender *AND* the list. So the sender gets two copies of everything. Which is just fricking irritating *AND* a waste of bandwidth. So you use list-reply like sensible people. Or you actually take the time to pay attention to who you're sending the message to. Aargh. help! i'm being drawn in! Michael
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:33:11PM -, Robert Shiels wrote: And does anyone know how to get putty to save settings like they key for backspace, etc, rather than my having to set them every time I start it? Do you mean setting the backspace to Control-H in the keyboard tab isn't working, or are there other esoteric things you want to set? The backspace-ctrl-h. I can set it once in putty, and it works, but if I quit putty and restart, new sessions don't get it. Michael
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 01:33:09PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: No, I'm not going to code a forum package by hand. go on dave, it cant be that hard Having done it a few times, it *isn't* that hard... Michael
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 04:50:39PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Neil Ford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: potential london clients will be put off dealing with a company not in london Seeing as this was about TPC, interesting subject change :-) apologise for that i've rejoined (void) and once again regard all mailing lists as one big holistic stream ;-) Ah, they all come back in the end... Michael
Hi. I have an (as yet unreleased) module called Mail::ListDetector, which takes a Mail::Internet object, and attempts to tell you if the message involved was posted to a mailing list, and if so, attempts to get some details about that list. I need testers - in particular, see if it builds and passes tests for you, and throw lots of messages at the sample script and see if you can get it to be inaccurate for any of them. If you can, please send me the message in question. (if you don't want to give out the content, just headers should do). Currently it should know about majordomo, smartlist, ezmlm, and mailman, although the majordomo and smartlist guessers are a bit experimental. It's at: http://www.etla.org/Mail-ListDetector-0.05.tar.gz Michael
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 08:37:02PM +, Kieran Barry wrote: TCL is used because its multithreaded. Perl 6 is going to be multithreaded. It should be able to wipe TCL out. I've never actually understood the appeal of threads. Why do people like them? Michael
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 10:58:54PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: y* Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 09:05:43PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: Ok, it's trolling a bit, but their main use seems to be where you don't want to bother to do proper nonblocking IO... quick web search They're apparently faster. And make it easier to share data. aside from the whole LWP aspect, i think the main appeal is they are a defined art - unlike the matre'd/minicab controller element of forked process management Hmm, it just always feels like someone sat down once and said "ok, we have two choices: 1) we could improve proccesses, and IPC, and make them useful and standard and easy for the task we want to do. 2) we could ignore the considerable work we spent implementing processes, and build a new form of thing, and them build all our standards on top of that ". And they picked the second option. we really want standardisation of technology interfaces in the industry, and threads go a little towards that - oh and a law that alows be to go around and shooting people who work in IT and i deep unworthy. I do agree with this part.
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 11:24:03PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: we really want standardisation of technology interfaces in the industry, and threads go a little towards that - oh and a law that alows be to go around and shooting people who work in IT and i deep unworthy. I do agree with this part. the standardisation on the bloody massacre part? Actually both. Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 11:42:52PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Paul Makepeace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Building reliability is probably your best aim: does it have a UPS? does it have a RAID 1/0 config? Dual PSUs? Tape drive backup policy? Those things are way more important than a faster chip or RAM. your right of course, however all of those things are more expensive and in some cases involve disgarding existing equipment and at the end of the day its a hobby machine that currently is lucky to have an average CPU usage of 0.1% per hour But when we start using it for the web site and the mailing list and that jobs thing I think jo is working on we're all gonna get really annoyed if it breaks... Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 09:42:11AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: yes and no. If you need to do an allnighter and its unavoidable (due to a client suddenly changing ther mind) then theres no problem doing it .. just charge em bigtime! nope this is where your pimp/MD should of tied up the contract watertight, so if they change their mind the deadline changes What do you do where this is not the case, other than think about finding a new job? Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 10:32:16AM +, Michael Stevens wrote: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 09:42:11AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: yes and no. If you need to do an allnighter and its unavoidable (due to a client suddenly changing ther mind) then theres no problem doing it .. just charge em bigtime! nope this is where your pimp/MD should of tied up the contract watertight, so if they change their mind the deadline changes What do you do where this is not the case, other than think about finding a new job? Although, thinking about it, I can also note that the "find a new job" approach seems to work... Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 02:41:57PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote: [gem@penderel gem]$ df -h FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda6 3.9G 879M 2.8G 24% / /dev/sda1 7.6M 2.9M 4.2M 41% /boot OK that'll be another disk or two then - if there are going to be a number of accounts on the machine then I would suggest /home should be a separate disk. I would vote for separate /usr /usr/local and /var partitions too. insert holy war here
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:31:00PM +, David Cantrell wrote: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 02:52:54PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote: I'm happy to set this up if anyone is interested (although, frankly, you'd be mad to let me anywhere near a root password and a copy of bind) Heh. djbdns is, despite being a bernsteinism, very good. For values of 'very good' which are equivalent to 'not bind'. It's smaller, easier to configure, and more secure. All in all, it's a Jolly Good Thing. aol
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 10:29:18AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: So I'm looking for advice on the best distro to use. Bear in mind that the existing box will currently become a firewall/proxy box so I'll do all the paranoid security stuff on there. Go for it. Give it your best shot. Let battle commence. Debian. Or, if you want uber-paranoia, OpenBSD. Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:48:03PM +, David Cantrell wrote: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:43:28PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:31:00PM +, David Cantrell wrote: Heh. djbdns is, despite being a bernsteinism, very good. For values of 'very good' which are equivalent to 'not bind'. It's smaller, easier to configure, and more secure. All in all, it's a Jolly Good Thing. aol However, I don't believe it supports some of the more weird DNS entries you can have like HINFO and LOC records. [dcantrel@tim-the-enchanter dcantrel]$ nslookup set type=HINFO ariadne.barnyard.co.uk ariadne.barnyard.co.ukCPU = Amstrad CPC OS = Amsdos / CPCIP Yay! Not supporting such silliness may be considered a Bad Thing by some people. I'm fairly sure it is supported, through an escape that allows you to return any record type. --cut-- :fqdn:n:rdata:ttl:timestamp:lo Generic record for fqdn. tinydns-data creates a record of type n for fqdn showing rdata. n must be an integer between 1 and 65535. The proper format of rdata depends on n. You may use octal \nnn codes to include arbitrary bytes inside rdata. --cut-- (from http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/tinydns-data.html) Michael
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 04:02:01PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On or about Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:58:41PM +, Richard Clamp typed: On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 03:44:42PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: I'd use Debian 'cos I like it. Downside: latest versions of stuff aren't usually available as packages. Untrue, if you're following the testing/unstable branch and have sufficient bandwidth that is. Depends on what you mean by "latest". Give it a week or two to get into unstable, a few more to get into testing - fair enough? Not what I'd use for CPAN modules, for example. And, of course, there's the obvious downside of following the unstable branch of anything... Michael
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 09:56:07AM +0100, Philip Newton wrote: Robin Szemeti wrote: as a matter of interest what is your fave Linux or *nix install then?? From what I've been reading on this list, Debian seems to be argued for quite a lot, as is FreeBSD (? I think -- one of the BSDs, anyway). I like Debian for general use, and OpenBSD for servers where there's a particular security concern... Michael
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 01:55:08PM -, dcross - David Cross wrote: Sounds a tad low to me. I've never contracted as a Perl programmer for less than 50/hr. Normally I'd estimate at about 500/day. I'd have thought that if we were selling ourselves as top-notch Perl consultants (Dave H's "getting it right" idea), then it would be more like double that. When I was working in cardiff the company I was working for would charge clients 500ukp/day for technical development. And this was cardiff. Michael
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 03:28:40PM +, Neil Ford wrote: Then there's the Psion 3 being used to detonate a bomb is a movie who's name I can't remember but it features the same Mr Segal being killed in the first 10 minutes or so. Executive Decision. Michael
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 11:26:28PM -0500, Mark Rogaski wrote: It's also sheer idiocy to pipe arbitrary code from an untrusted, unverified source directly to the shell. How is it less secure than downloading a tar file and typing ./configure? Admittedly you *could* check several meg of source for trojans, but I don't believe you *do*. Michael
On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 02:53:57PM +, David Cantrell wrote: Surely, then, rpm should have the ability to install and fetch dependencies from the network automagically? Yes it should. It doesn't. Which is why Helix's installer is so much easier to use. start type="holy_war" Or, more sensibly, debian. apt-get install foo already knows how to fetch foo from the network and install, grabbing any required dependencies. I even hear you can use it with rpms these days. Michael
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:24:59PM +, Shevek wrote: On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: I'm sure there are reasonable number of online manuals we'd all like printed copies of. Maybe we should see about costs for getting some of them printed fairly nicely and bound. I think the uni offers such a service here. What about us poor, benighted souls who aren't at a uni? :)
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:32:46PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: Jo Walsh sent the following bits through the ether: lets kill off the old list before the two get too far out of sync Nah, mailman on penderel - you know you want to! ;-) Yeah, we want our own mailing list server. And a pony.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 01:16:19PM +, Jo Walsh wrote: i would sooner install qmail/ezmlm than mailman would ppl object? I'd rather see exim/mailman but qmail is cool too. The most important bit is to get *something* working :) Michael
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 01:20:33PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: (Supposedly Mjd 2 is going to be better, RSN.) IIRC the postgresql mailing list are actually using it, or were. Don't think that it is done yet, tho. Smartlist is good. Mailman is good. ezmlm and qmail actually seem pretty nice, apart from the usual bernstein factor. Michael
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 01:27:50PM +, David Cantrell wrote: /me has a bone to pick with majordomo. majordomo + virtual domains = a whole world of hurt It's doable, you'll just wish you hadn't. Michael
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 01:51:15PM +, David Cantrell wrote: Good thing: the error messages were short enough to fit into an SMS Bad thing: they contained no useful information whatsoever I Will Not Give In. I Will Not Install Python. I actually kinda like python, from the little I've played with it. Michael
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:25:54AM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote: Michael Stevens writes: I'm sure there are reasonable number of online manuals we'd all like printed copies of. Yeah, but if O'Reilly were to print them, you'd complain that the book was nothing more than the online manual :-) Yes, but that's because you have such a good reputation for delivering *more* than the online manual! Michael
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:12:37PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: Ok, we are not (void) but we are pretty close so here is a one liner that hopefully will provote discussion the only thing that gives potential for the marketing of a language is the projects that are achieved using it and java has a hell of a lot more cool projects than perl What are these mysterious cool java projects that no-one's been telling me about? /me is thinking of a new london.pm project called ``ignore the perl 6 body and parallel to it lets create our own perl propoganda/marketting/best practice/for the good fo the language movement'' I think the best thing people can do for the language is create good things and modules and whatever using it.
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:10:24PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: That was Sili of you On the plus side, They Have Lots Of Books, which makes up for almost all their faults.
You know you're drunk when, faced with the problem of getting through an underground ticket gate, you get out your house keys and start fiddling with them looking for the right one. Michael
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:49:58AM +, Aaron Trevena wrote: erm.. whats the irc channel for london.pm again. I spose I'll have to download bitchx as well now. irc.rhizomatic.net #london.pm Michael
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:56:38PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: * Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:49:58AM +, Aaron Trevena wrote: erm.. whats the irc channel for london.pm again. I spose I'll have to download bitchx as well now. irc.rhizomatic.net #london.pm london.rhizomatic.net I prefer irc. YMMV.
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 04:00:35PM +, Mark Fowler wrote: PLPM++I answer questions (correctly) on #london.pm But aren't most of the questions on #london.pm of the form "shall we go down the pub then?", to which there is a simple answer that's almost always correct... PLPM+ I occasionally visit #london.pm I like the idea that we're an actual place. Maybe a good bar or curryhouse.
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 06:28:29PM +, David Hodgkinson wrote: Michael Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I like the idea that we're an actual place. Maybe a good bar or curryhouse. That wouldn't be Penderel's Oak then... We're meeting on Thursday, right? If we aren't I'm going to be getting pretty lonely drinking on my own...
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 08:52:56PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: I'll join you. Leo said he was coming too. I may even make it this time. I think we *are* having a proper meeting, anyway. Looking forward to recover from spending christmas at home... Michael