James Pattie wrote: > For now I was planning on providing the ability to download > just those changes you want to add to your copy of the > blacklist database. Since I'm already downloading the > blacklist database on a weekly basis I could provide a link > to our copy, but it would probably be better if you had a > script in place that pulled down a copy to your machine and > then merged in the changes that we are keeping track of for you.
James, I don't think you have anything to sell. Have you noticed that you've downloaded exactly the same blacklist file 4 or 5 times? The blacklist on the squidGuard site has *not* been updated since September 30, 2001. That's what we need, somebody who will run the robot on a consistent, regular basis. Scripts for downloading and installing the blacklist have been shared here at least twice in the last 12 months. One script included adding a set of local data. Your cron script takes the loooong way around, by the way. All you need to do is: cat domains domains.local | sort | uniq > domains.temp mv -f domains.temp domains > The .local file is a file that squidGuard is not using > and so should always be left alone, unless you blow > away the entire blacklist directory. That's a good point; it makes sense to me. > I've been going on the assumption of if a site is > blocked in porn (cnn.com) that you just add it to the > allowed/domain file and your good to go. That would work. Unnecessary overhead, but it would work. > This wasn't something we planned for but might be > implementable in a future version. Tell me again what it is that you will be doing that I'll be paying for? Is this it: > Since I'm already downloading the blacklist database > on a weekly basis I could provide a link to our copy, > but it would probably be better if you had a script in > place that pulled down a copy to your machine and then > merged in the changes that we are keeping track of for you. So instead of entering my changes into domains.diff and urls.diff files, I pay you so that I can enter them into a web page instead, right? I just don't see who would see value in that.
