Menu
▾
▴
nms-cgi-devel
|
From: Olivier D. <dr...@sh...> - 2002-01-29 00:48:21
|
I'd like to make a proposition for the header of each scripts. <<<<<< #!/usr/bin/perl -wT ######################################################## # Program information ################################## ######################################################## # ProgramName.pl v1.2.3.4.5.6... # # This program is licensed in the same way as Perl # itself. You are free to choose between the GNU Public # License <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> or # the Artistic License # <http://www.perl.com/pub/a/language/misc/Artistic.html> # # For a list of changes see CHANGELOG # # For help on configuration or installation see README ######################################################## # DO NOT CHANGE! ####################################### ######################################################## # use strict; use ...; . . . # ######################################################## # Configuration ######################################## ######################################################## # Modify these to your own settings. You might have to # contact your system administrator if you do not run # your own web server. If the purpose of these # parameters seems unclear, please see the README file. # my $param = "stuff"; # Will be used for stuff my $baseurl = "/var/www"; # Server's web documents directory my ...; . . . # ######################################################## # Main program ######################################### ######################################################## # From now on, you should not have to change anything in # order for the program to work. If the program does not # work, review your configuration above or contact your # system administrator. # *code* >>>>>> Let me know what you think. The only thing I feel uncomfortable with is the license declaration which I took from the FAQ. The rest, I think would look much better than we have right now. I intend to implement those changes myself if everyone agrees with them. -Oli -- +----------------------------------------------+ | Olivier Dragon dr...@sh... | | Software Engineering II, McMaster University | +----------------------------------------------+ |
|
From: Olivier D. <dr...@sh...> - 2002-01-29 02:10:55
|
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:51:14PM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote: > Eww... this is very ugly, and very similar to the way Matt Wright did > it. Flower boxes are reminiscent of BASIC; I don't know of anyone who > still uses them in production code, especially perl code. I think the way > we have the configuration section delimited now is fine. I'm confused... Do we want those scripts to be as much as humainly possible like Matt Wright's or not? As for flower boxes, they make things clear. And as many newbies will tell you they like things when it's clear. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall this project to be for non-technical people who know very little about programming, and probably even less about Perl. I'm new to this project so please, let me know if my stream of thought is going in the wrong direction. Also, another reason why I don't like the way it is now is because of the very long long long long long log at the beginning of each programs. I think logs belongs in a seperate file, but again, that's just my opinion. If nobody else agrees (like in the case of constants) then we'll leave it this way. > The necessary information is in the README. In fact, I think its > harmful to put the descriptions of the config in the script itself, as a > lazy user may attempt to decipher the variables just from the description > and never look at the README for more complete explanations. I agree with that. I put short brief comments by the config parameters but I think having the warning at the top is enough to direct users who don't understand to the README file. -Oli -- +----------------------------------------------+ | Olivier Dragon dr...@sh... | | Software Engineering II, McMaster University | +----------------------------------------------+ |
|
From: Olivier D. <dr...@sh...> - 2002-01-29 03:45:59
Attachments:
formmail_testpatch.diff
|
I've created a patch for formmail that uses the skeleton previously mentionned so you can see what it looks like in a real program and see if you like it or not. Note that the log got moved to a file CHANGELOG, hence the ? formmail/CHANGELOG line at the top of the diff. -Oli -- +----------------------------------------------+ | Olivier Dragon dr...@sh... | | Software Engineering II, McMaster University | +----------------------------------------------+ |
|
From: Olivier D. <dr...@sh...> - 2002-01-29 12:53:05
|
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:55:15PM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote: > That log is added by CVS... its there for a reason. I know. However I don't see why it could not be added to CHANGELOG instead of PerlProgram.pl... I just think its place is not in PerlProgram.pl because that'll keep away a lot of newbies from using the scripts (in my opinion). Here's how I see it: in a year from now, after several other revisions, the log at the beginning of each program is going to be *several pages long*. Not only is this going to be annoying for anyone wanting to modify it but it'll also be a major hit to the user friendliness we're trying to achieve. If I had the choice between two programs (most people don't really see or look for security first) my first pick would be the program which is easy to configure (ie. where it's specified clearly what settings I change and what I don't change), and the one where I don't have to hit pagedown 10 times before I get to the configuration -> we're driving people back to MWS which defeats the purpose of this project. Anyone else has an idea on this? Tell me if I'm being stupid :o) -Oli -- +----------------------------------------------+ | Olivier Dragon dr...@sh... | | Software Engineering II, McMaster University | +----------------------------------------------+ |
|
From: iain t. <ic...@eh...> - 2002-01-29 13:10:29
|
* Olivier Dragon (dr...@sh...) [30 Jan 2002 00:11]: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:55:15PM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote: > > That log is added by CVS... its there for a reason. > I know. However I don't see why it could not be added to CHANGELOG > instead of PerlProgram.pl... I just think its place is not in > PerlProgram.pl because that'll keep away a lot of newbies from using > the scripts (in my opinion). I'd have to agree - the CVS log is somewhat long and irrelevant. Having it as a separate file makes more sense. Perhaps a release builder script could extract that sort of info from CVS (i.e. 'cvs log prog.pl') and bundle it with the rest of the program? BTW: Why am I getting Oliver's replies but not the messages to which Oliver replies? Are people sending privately rather than to the list? It's really much more helpful if people send to the list - volume is good and it may well save duplication and it means everything is on record, such as design decisions. cheers, -- iain. <http://eh.org/~koschei/> |
|
From: Wizard <wi...@ne...> - 2002-01-29 13:29:43
|
> BTW: Why am I getting Oliver's replies but not the messages to which > Oliver replies? Are people sending privately rather than to the list? > It's really much more helpful if people send to the list - volume is > good and it may well save duplication and it means everything is on > record, such as design decisions. The list sets the 'From' address to the sender's address, and the 'CC' address to the distribution list. Most other lists do it this way, which I think is stupid. It should set the 'From' address to either both addresses (which I'm not sure is possible), or just the list address, and leave the 'CC' field blank. In order to reply to the list presently, you need to 'Reply to all'. You can then remove the sender's email address. Actually, what might be best would be if the list would set the 'From' address to "User Name co nms <nms...@li...>". This would show the User's name in most MUAs, but reply to the list. This would also be nice for anonymity from email harvesters and to keep people from flaming privately without using the list. Grant M. |
|
From: Dave C. <da...@da...> - 2002-01-29 13:54:12
|
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 08:27:52AM -0800, Wizard (wi...@ne...) wrote: > > BTW: Why am I getting Oliver's replies but not the messages to which > > Oliver replies? Are people sending privately rather than to the list? > > It's really much more helpful if people send to the list - volume is > > good and it may well save duplication and it means everything is on > > record, such as design decisions. > > The list sets the 'From' address to the sender's address, and the 'CC' > address to the distribution list. Most other lists do it this way, which I > think is stupid. It should set the 'From' address to either both addresses > (which I'm not sure is possible), or just the list address, and leave the > 'CC' field blank. > In order to reply to the list presently, you need to 'Reply to all'. You can > then remove the sender's email address. > > Actually, what might be best would be if the list would set the 'From' > address to "User Name co nms <nms...@li...>". This > would show the User's name in most MUAs, but reply to the list. This would > also be nice for anonymity from email harvesters and to keep people from > flaming privately without using the list. My personal feeling is that I dislike reply-to munging and prefer lists to act the way that this one does. On the support list, where the people posting (or at least one half of them!) might be a little less technically clued-up I can certainly see the argument for reply-to munging. However, all discussion on this topic is pointless as Sourceforge have decreed that all lists hosting on their server won't be able to munge "reply-to" headers. That option has been disabled in the the mailman configuration screen. Their policy on this is available at: <https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6693&group_id=1> If anyone could persuade Sourceforge to change thier policy then I'd be very happy to set the list in accordance with the majority's preferences, but until that day there is no point in continuing this discussion. And please remember to use "reply-all" or "group-reply" when replying to emails from this mailing list. Dave... -- Don't dream it... be it |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X