date:20190109

Ed - thanks again for your input. I actually did reach Barb - and 
connected via LinkedIn. Only to find that, sadly, she lost her job this 
past Nov. - and is now struggling looking for work as I am! And, she did 
indeed remember you.


So - thanks again for the suggestion.

Kurt

On 1/8/2019 12:53 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:

On Jan 8, 2019, at 2:14 PM, Kurt @ Gmail  wrote:

So - was curious to know if any of you are located in SD - I believe someone is.

IIRC, Barb Peisch is in San Diego: http://peisch.com/


-- Ed Leafe







[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/e424d442-5aea-9084-0f75-568a1a3f0...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


+1.

On 1/9/2019 2:36 PM, Paul H. Tarver wrote:

+1.

I'd chip in too!

Paul H. Tarver
Email: p...@tpcqpc.com



-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of 
mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2019 3:07 PM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


Well, if ever needed, do a GoFundMe (or better site) campaign and we'll
all chip in.  I know I'd have no problem throwing a few bucks at this as
a "thank you" for such a great resource.




[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/673b6957-2c1f-e88d-3e76-a38dcc259...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread Paul H. Tarver

+1. 

I'd chip in too!

Paul H. Tarver
Email: p...@tpcqpc.com 



-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of 
mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2019 3:07 PM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


Well, if ever needed, do a GoFundMe (or better site) campaign and we'll 
all chip in.  I know I'd have no problem throwing a few bucks at this as 
a "thank you" for such a great resource.



___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/01bf01d4a86b$bc955fa0$35c01ee0$@tpcqpc.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Custom Scrollbar

2019-01-09 Thread Jean Laeremans

You don't say.

Op wo 9 jan. 2019 21:54 schreef  > At 08:18 2019-01-06, Jean Laeremans 
> > wrote:
> >> If memory serves me right he must be at it for at least 15 years.
>
>
> lol...we've been hanging around this barber shop for quite a long
> time  ;-)
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/capqlobzpjnq0fcp4rcccdvurgypmkm0tj6auv+nf2tdbu83...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread John Weller

+1

John Weller
01380 723235
07976 393631


Well, if ever needed, do a GoFundMe (or better site) campaign and we'll all 
chip in.  I know I'd have no problem throwing a few bucks at this as a "thank 
you" for such a great resource.




___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/000401d4a862$b082f1e0$1188d5a0$@johnweller.co.uk
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread Charles Hart Enzer, M.D.

I assume you have checked out Google Groups

And thank you for the many years of yeomanship

*Shai / שי **Charles Hart Enzer, MD(Ohio, USA), FAACAP*
*Aliyah : Cincinnati to Jerusalem
's German Colony
 May, 2017*

*Volunteer Associate Professor of PsychiatryUniversity of Cincinnati
Medical CenterWebSite: **EnzerMD.com *
*Publications* 

*If a problem has no solution, *
*   it may not be a problem, *
*but a fact -- not to be solved, *
*  but to be coped with over time*

-- Shimon Peres, Ninth President of Israel

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 8:52 PM Ed Leafe  wrote:

> Many of you have had problems receiving mail from the list, as my domain
> is hosted on a server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket blocks on
> any IP addresses from cloud providers like mine (Digital Ocean).
>
> I’m testing out a new relay service, Mailgun (https://www.mailgun.com/).
> So far it seems to be running well, but if any of you on the receiving end
> of things notices a problem, please let me know.
>
> One other issue is the cost: it’s free if the total # of emails sent is
> under 100K, but gets expensive above that. Last year the highest number of
> emails sent in a month was 280 in May, which is about 133,000 total emails,
> and that would have cost $120 for that month (ouch!). So I’m not sure if I
> will keep it, but it’s worth a trial at least.
>
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAFSdja3UJO+Rp-P974YS8rbz_x0OdoRdh4C=0utamognbbu...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

On 2019-01-09 16:02, Ed Leafe wrote:

On Jan 9, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Kurt @ Gmail wrote:

Ed - I really do NOT think you should use this service - since its
Pricey - and there's NO Reason why you should pay for the service when
these forums don't even Net you ANY $$$!

Most months were below the level that the service would be free -
around 210 messages / month. And it would be nice to not have to hunt
down why various people aren’t getting their messages, which usually
ends up being “my ISP is blocking you”.

Also - you do this same similar forum for Python - don't you? Which,
if so, increases total # of emails, and thus the monthly cost. Or,
maybe the cost is Per forum type - not grouped together…

I also host the ProLinux and ProPython lists, which were set up to not
clog up ProFox with discussions of moving to Linux or programming in
Python. While they were busy at first, in 2018 they had 17 and 15
messages for the *entire year*, of which 13 were the monthly/yearly
statistics postings. So those don’t really make much of an impact.

Well, if ever needed, do a GoFundMe (or better site) campaign and we'll
all chip in. I know I'd have no problem throwing a few bucks at this as
a "thank you" for such a great resource.

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4dcef296780e49477701b0d1cb298...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

On Jan 9, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> 
> around 210 messages / month

OK, before anyone starts quibbling over this: I meant 210 *postings* per month, 
which, sent to 475 subscribers, makes 99,750 total email messages sent: just 
below the 100K threshold.

-- Ed Leafe

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/776ad154-1504-49e5-905c-8e5ec7905...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

On Jan 9, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Kurt @ Gmail  wrote:
> 
> Ed - I really do NOT think you should use this service - since its Pricey - 
> and there's NO Reason why you should pay for the service when these forums 
> don't even Net you ANY $$$!

Most months were below the level that the service would be free - around 210 
messages / month. And it would be nice to not have to hunt down why various 
people aren’t getting their messages, which usually ends up being “my ISP is 
blocking you”.

> Also - you do this same similar forum for Python - don't you? Which, if so, 
> increases total # of emails, and thus the monthly cost. Or, maybe the cost is 
> Per forum type - not grouped together…

I also host the ProLinux and ProPython lists, which were set up to not clog up 
ProFox with discussions of moving to Linux or programming in Python. While they 
were busy at first, in 2018 they had 17 and 15 messages for the *entire year*, 
of which 13 were the monthly/yearly statistics postings. So those don’t really 
make much of an impact.

-- Ed Leafe

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/a9f71897-5b66-484c-aea7-095cf2ccc...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

Too late - I already replied back to your last response! But - i know 
what happened - you read things in order - and replied immediately 
instead of seeing the other replies to the thread...


-K-

On 1/9/2019 12:58 PM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:

On 2019-01-09 14:13, Ed Leafe wrote:

On Jan 9, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Gene Wirchenko  wrote:


    The numbers do not make sense.  Does that "100K" mean 100,000 
messages or 100 kilobytes?  How does 280 relate to 133,000?


It’s a monthly limit on the number of messages. And as Ted pointed
out, each post gets sent to each subscriber: 475 as of last May,
though it’s down to 474 as of Jan1
(https://leafe.com/archives/msg/512459). So that’s where the 133K
comes from.



Ah, I see this now.  Please disregard my last post.


[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d9360deb-a5c2-96b3-1c8e-d5a3cc761...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


On 2019-01-09 14:13, Ed Leafe wrote:

On Jan 9, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Gene Wirchenko  wrote:


The numbers do not make sense.  Does that "100K" mean 100,000 
messages or 100 kilobytes?  How does 280 relate to 133,000?


It’s a monthly limit on the number of messages. And as Ted pointed
out, each post gets sent to each subscriber: 475 as of last May,
though it’s down to 474 as of Jan1
(https://leafe.com/archives/msg/512459). So that’s where the 133K
comes from.



Ah, I see this now.  Please disregard my last post.

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c79243280a3e7d7986e6ab48c9ebf...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: Custom Scrollbar

At 08:18 2019-01-06, Jean Laeremans  
wrote:

If memory serves me right he must be at it for at least 15 years.



lol...we've been hanging around this barber shop for quite a long 
time  ;-)


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/80c505ec4c528d0fb9866b729214e...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


Mike - yeah, both Ed & Ted already answered that Q.

Issue is - its the monthly emails Times the total # of subscribers - 
which equates to the large 133K # total!


Ed - I really do NOT think you should use this service - since its 
Pricey - and there's NO Reason why you should pay for the service when 
these forums don't even Net you ANY $$$!


Also - you do this same similar forum for Python - don't you? Which, if 
so, increases total # of emails, and thus the monthly cost. Or, maybe 
the cost is Per forum type - not grouped together...


My 2.05 centavos - upgraded for inflation...

-K-

On 1/9/2019 12:51 PM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:

On 2019-01-09 13:51, Ed Leafe wrote:

Many of you have had problems receiving mail from the list, as my
domain is hosted on a server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket
blocks on any IP addresses from cloud providers like mine (Digital
Ocean).

I’m testing out a new relay service, Mailgun
(https://www.mailgun.com/). So far it seems to be running well, but if
any of you on the receiving end of things notices a problem, please
let me know.

One other issue is the cost: it’s free if the total # of emails sent
is under 100K, but gets expensive above that. Last year the highest
number of emails sent in a month was 280 in May, which is about
133,000 total emails, and that would have cost $120 for that month
(ouch!). So I’m not sure if I will keep it, but it’s worth a trial at
least.



First and foremost, thanks again Ed for doing this list!!!

Help me out with that math on the above.  280 emails in May...that 
multiplied by 12 months equates to 3360 emails for the year.  Or is 
multiplied by the number of folks subscribed to arrive at your 133,000 
number?



[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/5bc70633-61b4-5c00-ebdb-3e4c6929a...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay


On 2019-01-09 13:51, Ed Leafe wrote:

Many of you have had problems receiving mail from the list, as my
domain is hosted on a server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket
blocks on any IP addresses from cloud providers like mine (Digital
Ocean).

I’m testing out a new relay service, Mailgun
(https://www.mailgun.com/). So far it seems to be running well, but if
any of you on the receiving end of things notices a problem, please
let me know.

One other issue is the cost: it’s free if the total # of emails sent
is under 100K, but gets expensive above that. Last year the highest
number of emails sent in a month was 280 in May, which is about
133,000 total emails, and that would have cost $120 for that month
(ouch!). So I’m not sure if I will keep it, but it’s worth a trial at
least.



First and foremost, thanks again Ed for doing this list!!!

Help me out with that math on the above.  280 emails in May...that 
multiplied by 12 months equates to 3360 emails for the year.  Or is 
multiplied by the number of folks subscribed to arrive at your 133,000 
number?


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/bd262f6b3f01016bfc0063288be27...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

On Jan 9, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Gene Wirchenko  wrote:
> 
> The numbers do not make sense.  Does that "100K" mean 100,000 messages or 
> 100 kilobytes?  How does 280 relate to 133,000?

It’s a monthly limit on the number of messages. And as Ted pointed out, each 
post gets sent to each subscriber: 475 as of last May, though it’s down to 474 
as of Jan1 (https://leafe.com/archives/msg/512459). So that’s where the 133K 
comes from.

-- Ed Leafe

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/86e10cd5-3df7-4012-8b07-0ae9587a0...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread Ted Roche

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 1:58 PM Gene Wirchenko  wrote:

> How does 280 relate to 133,000?
>

133,000 is EXACTLY 475 times 280, so it is possible that there are 475
subscribers receiving 280 messages.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cacw6n4uvbx09pzbsgdfnhbjinfsgswvx3+ma0zqmx7zs5ag...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread Fernando D. Bozzo

Test PASSED! - Green light

:D


El mié., 9 ene. 2019 a las 19:52, Ed Leafe () escribió:

> Many of you have had problems receiving mail from the list, as my domain
> is hosted on a server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket blocks on
> any IP addresses from cloud providers like mine (Digital Ocean).
>
> I’m testing out a new relay service, Mailgun (https://www.mailgun.com/).
> So far it seems to be running well, but if any of you on the receiving end
> of things notices a problem, please let me know.
>
> One other issue is the cost: it’s free if the total # of emails sent is
> under 100K, but gets expensive above that. Last year the highest number of
> emails sent in a month was 280 in May, which is about 133,000 total emails,
> and that would have cost $120 for that month (ouch!). So I’m not sure if I
> will keep it, but it’s worth a trial at least.
>
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAGQ_JunF5SzSQR9ZF+GiQUjXrn_FVj=8adfemtgr2tshqds...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

2019-01-09 Thread Gene Wirchenko


At 10:51 2019-01-09, Ed Leafe  wrote:
Many of you have had problems receiving mail 
from the list, as my domain is hosted on a 
server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket 
blocks on any IP addresses from cloud providers 
like mine (Digital Ocean). Iâm testing out a 
new relay service, Mailgun 
(https://www.mailgun.com/). So far it seems to 
be running well, but if any of you on the 
receiving end of things notices a problem, 
please let me know. One other issue is the cost: 
itâs free if the total # of emails sent is 
under 100K, but gets expensive above that. Last 
year the highest number of emails sent in a 
month was 280 in May, which is about 133,000 
total emails, and that would have cost $120 for 
that month (ouch!). So Iâm not sure if I will 
keep it, but itâs worth a trial at least.


 The numbers do not make sense.  Does that 
"100K" mean 100,000 messages or 100 kilobytes?  How does 280 relate to 133,000?


 For testing, I suggest that you send some 
regular test messages.  You might send three per 
day evenly spaced over a week, and number 
them.  "This is test message 1.", "This is test 
message 2.", etc.  Any of us noticing some missing can let you know.


Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d25cf5c51ab489070acc6c343b49bea6@mtlp83
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: AW: Custom Scrollbar

2019-01-09 Thread Gene Wirchenko


At 05:28 2019-01-08, Frank Cazabon  wrote:
Gene, back in April last year you were asking if anyone could write 
code to your specification regarding the grid problems you were 
having. I don't recall ever seeing your specification, maybe if you 
posted it someone might be able to do the code for you.


 At that time, I was also having difficulties posting to the 
list.  I thought I had come up with something, but maybe, it did not 
make it and I mistakenly deleted it.  Let me specify something simple:


 Consider a cursor or table of:
  thetext c(20)
  evennr n(3)
  weirdnr n(3)

The validations are:
  thetext>""
  evennr%2=0
  weirdnr%3=0
and the row-level validation is:
  asc(thetext)%2=weirdnr%2

 When a control-level validation error occurs, throw an 
appropriate message box and then set focus to the control with the 
erroneous value.


 For a row-level validation:

  1) All control-level validations should be done first.  Start with 
the current control, then do all the others from left to right.  The 
first that fails gets the message box, and checking stops.


 Then, do the row-level validation.  If it fails, throw an 
aoppropriate message box and then set focus to the control in the 
first column from the left of the values that are checked.  (In the 
example above, thetext is left of weirdnr, so set focus to thetext.)


Part 2:

 The columns can now be rearranged in any order.  Despite this:

 The coontrol-level validations should still set focus to the 
correct control.


 The column-level validations done at the start of the row-level 
validation should be done in the order current then 
left-to-right.  NOTE THAT THIS COULD NOW BE A DIFFERENT ORDER.


 The row-level validation should still set focus to the leftmost 
involved control.  NOTE THAT THIS MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT 
CONTROL.  (Example: If weirdnr gets moved to the left of thetext, 
row-level validation failing should set focus to weirdnr.)



 This is basic functionality that I want/need.  I have been 
unable to get this to work with VFP's Grid despite my efforts.


[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/731e29e7879827379eafb5958e3b7f26@mtlp83
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[ADMIN] Testing new mail relay

Many of you have had problems receiving mail from the list, as my domain is 
hosted on a server in the cloud, and many ISPs have blanket blocks on any IP 
addresses from cloud providers like mine (Digital Ocean).

I’m testing out a new relay service, Mailgun (https://www.mailgun.com/). So far 
it seems to be running well, but if any of you on the receiving end of things 
notices a problem, please let me know.

One other issue is the cost: it’s free if the total # of emails sent is under 
100K, but gets expensive above that. Last year the highest number of emails 
sent in a month was 280 in May, which is about 133,000 total emails, and that 
would have cost $120 for that month (ouch!). So I’m not sure if I will keep it, 
but it’s worth a trial at least.


-- Ed Leafe






___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/63d39e29-6fa5-4377-b2c7-eea6350bb...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: AW: Custom Scrollbar

2019-01-09 Thread Gene Wirchenko


At 07:54 2019-01-09, you wrote:
Gene, correct me if I'm wrong, but as far back as this list goes, I 
remember you talking about your own VFP grid replacement, honestly 
as far back as 15+ years ago.  Am I right?


 Yes and no.

 I have tried over that time, but most of the time, I have had 
to work on other stuff.  My own grid is a low priority until I have 
something useful working.


 I have tried to work with VFP's Grid control and kept running 
into trouble.


[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/f7adc88592eecdc2621a1247365351dc@mtlp83
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: VSS to git conversion

2019-01-09 Thread Stephen Russell

Well stated.  I am lead on a project to replace VSS with a new tool.  The
team gets really pissed when it doesn't work exactly like VSS does.

I am saving this text to share at the next meeting.




On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 1:33 AM Fernando D. Bozzo  wrote:

> When people leave VSS for a new SCM tool, one of the first mistakes that
> many of them make is to try to use the new SCM tool in the same way that
> they used VSS, and they do not realize that the new SCM tools are designed
> With a different mindset and considering a different work flow, it is an
> evolution of the old way of doing things.
>
> If one tries to change this type of tool for a new one with the same
> mentality and is not evolving in the way of doing things, then he could not
> obtain the benefits of the new way of doing things and he will simply
> repeat what he knows.
>
> Applying this to VFP, many people try to use something like Git or similar
> with the same workflow they used with VSS, for example, blocking modified
> files so that no one else can modify them, and doing this is in the 21st
> century on a computer local or distributed, it's a huge mistake.
>
> Some of those benefits are speed, concurrency and independence.
>
> Speed because allowing several people to work on the same component is
> better and faster than one at a time
>
> Concurrence due to the same, 2 or more people can work in different
> arrangements or functions in the same component at the same time without
> blocking each other
>
> Independence because if one of the people who works on a component (form,
> class library) leaves the edition open and leaves (vacation, illness,
> etc.), nobody is blocked and others can continue working on it.
>
> VSS treated the files independently, one by one, and this is one of the
> great changes with the new tools, since they are no longer individual
> files, now there is a set of changes composed of many modified files
> related to the task, for what when you need to know what files were
> modified for a solution / feature, you can know.
>
> VSS was useful at the time with the mentality of its time, but now there
> are better ways of doing things and thinking about the code and if you want
> to make that transition and improve the way you work with the code, then it
> is convenient to learn how to do it as it is done now, although really the
> new way of working has already been in existence for more than 15 years.
>
> The best way to take advantage of all this in VFP is not to tie yourself to
> the VSS way of doing things, not to think about files but about features or
> arrangements, and focus on that. Forget SccText and what was already
> generated with it and regenerate all text files with FoxBin2Prg to start
> benefiting from being able to make code mixes like the rest of the
> languages do.
>
> The branches by task help to work in this way. VSS could not work with
> branches in a useful or efficient way, now it can and is very useful, since
> you can be working on several features and arrangements at the same time
> without interfering with each other.
>
> Many of the changes in the way of work have to do also with the new way of
> making the code mixes, the composition of the components through the
> different contributions of the developers, something unimaginable with VSS.
>
> Finally, leave open the possibility of not wanting to continue controlling
> everything from the project manager, which is very comfortable for the old
> way of working, but it is not efficient when you can be working on one
> feature at a time and the next moment you have to leave all by halves and
> continue working in another branch for an important arrangement.
>
> In order to do this, it is better and more efficient to separate the
> management of the VFP project manager code and manage it with the SCM tool
> chosen, outside of VFP. At first it is difficult to get used to the idea,
> especially when they have been using the same thing for many years, but
> then one gets used to another form of work and discovers the advantages
> that I mention.
>
> Best Regards!
>
> Fernando D. Bozzo
>
>
>
> El 9 ene. 2019 2:24 a. m., "Fletcher Johnson" 
> escribió:
>
> Tracy,
>
> Now I remember.  I actually had a program that I could run that would
> re-sort the scx (or the generated code) and then re-format the code so that
> the code was always in more or less the same sequence and format. I am
> guessing that whoever wrote FoxBin2PRG had some of the same frustrations
> and
> was nice enough to build something more robust and then publish it.
>
> When VSS support was first added, the theory was that any source control
> could be used.  I often wondered if the hooks were still there so that Git
> could be used as (more or less) seamlessly as VSS.
>
> I hope things work out,
>
>
> Fletcher
>
>
> Fletcher Johnson
> fletchersjohn...@yahoo.com
> LinkedIn.com/in/FletcherJohnson
> beknown.com/FletcherJohnson
> twitter.com/fletcherJ
> twitter.com/svcsug
>

Re: AW: Custom Scrollbar

Gene, correct me if I'm wrong, but as far back as this list goes, I
remember you talking about your own VFP grid replacement, honestly as
far back as 15+ years ago. Am I right?

On 2019-01-07 00:20, Gene Wirchenko wrote:

At 08:13 2019-01-06, wrote:

>> I want to create my own grid

WHY, just WHY?

Because the VFP grid does not work.

Haven't yet found a problem for which I would need a homegrown grid.
What can't you do in VFP's native grid, in combination with the
excellent
container hierarchy which you could add into any / every column of a
grid?

Full validation of a row.

I came close, but it required a lot of kludges and an innocent
change in one place could blow it up.

Build a set of controls, save them as class, add that class to the
Column,
change Column.CurrentControl to point to that class, set Column.Sparse
to
.F. and presto, you can do any complicated setup and stil have the
benefits

of VFP's native gridspeed.

I wish.

One of the things that Grid is supposedly not for is data entry.
I need a grid that can handle that.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/0f90af823f1fcb463af85388bd69f...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: VSS to git conversion

2019-01-09 Thread Tracy Pearson

Ed,

I've been going through that. 

Thank you,
Tracy

-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2019 9:55 AM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: VSS to git conversion

On Jan 9, 2019, at 8:13 AM, Tracy Pearson  wrote:
> 
> This is why I'm looking for a way to convert VSS to Git. But during the
conversion I want to take out the *.sca/*.vca files and change them to
*.sc2/*.vc2 files. Get the history in to Git without being encumbered with
VSS clutter.

Maybe this could provide you with a starting point?
https://github.com/trevorr/vss2git

-- Ed Leafe

[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/001101d4a82d$da0f7db0$8e2e7910$@powerchurch.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: VSS to git conversion