Re: Strange Request

2001-03-18 Thread Jonathan Stowe
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-18 Thread Jonathan Stowe
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. You've got Socket of course :) /J\ -- Jonathan Stowe [EMAIL

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread Dave Cross
At 09:32 13/03/2001, you wrote: At 09:27 13/03/01 +, you wrote: At 09:08 13/03/2001, you wrote: If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them 50 cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Good advert for the book - lucky you only get to see it once you've read the book! not read, bought! theres the big catch still we've done this argument several times and at the end of the day people want to be able to just grab a piece of ``perl cgi

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread Dean
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:52:12AM +, Dave Cross wrote: Just been wandering around the website and (as an owner of the book) was able to access the 'private' areas. Well if you have a look at the vulnerabilitys database on securityfocus.com then you too can be an admin of the message

RE: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread Jonathan Peterson
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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

RE: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread Jonathan Peterson
That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt. I thought Selena was female. Oh well.

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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 counts 15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to rewrite them all? I've done his

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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 i

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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 w

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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 ha

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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] wr

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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:

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

RE: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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,

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

2001-03-13 Thread 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,

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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,

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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,

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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 +,

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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: Strange Request

2001-03-13 Thread 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

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-12 Thread Philip Newton
Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: MBM (runs away very fast from ever having to touch a piece of code by the now infamous Matt Wright ever again...) That reminds me of something I saw on the weekend: http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: "For your convienience, we

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-12 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: "For your convienience, we have a public CGI directory available to all our Unix hosting customers. included is FormMail, the industry-standard form-to-email processor."

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-12 Thread David H. Adler
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:28:42AM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: "For your convienience, we have a public CGI directory available to all our Unix hosting customers. included is

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-12 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: well .. to be fair .. yes its appalling Perl but it works, and it IS the industry standard if only because there is nothing better freely available. Maybe I missed a meeting again, but doesn't the "industry" tend to refuse the standardness of

Strange Request

2001-03-09 Thread Dean
Does any one here have any smallish programs (around the 50 lines mark) that are badly written and need a tidy up? (I've seen the 12 steps, i know your hiding the good stuff) I'm looking for a few bits of code (Not Obfuscated contest level though :)) that i can use as examples of bad coding

Re: Strange Request

2001-03-09 Thread Matthew Byng-Maddick
On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Dean wrote: code (Not Obfuscated contest level though :)) that i can use as examples of bad coding style. If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) This is probably your best bet :) MBM (runs away very fast from ever having to touch a piece of code