51
MorelyDotes
Re: 1 x beta tester needed for Web Hosting Module

This looks pretty exciting to me, Bassman. Can I wheedle a projected release date out of you?



52
MorelyDotes
Re: Double Standards

Quote:

It's strange for me to be in the role of MS apologist but your sniping was mis-aimed in this case. I feel icky now.... Thanks a lot.


When I wrote that, I had open on the laptop next to me the Windows Update page for XP Pro. It states rather emphatically that "Windows XP Support on Windows Update sill soon require XP SP1 or later."

Ever heard of Windows Product Activation? As a method of "punishing" those who have bypassed the proper method of obtaining Windows, Microsoft has stated that it is their intention to withold updates (including security updates) from people who have not applied SP1. It is well-known that SP1 (and later service packs) tighten the WPA down and de-activate pirated copies of XP. The end result is that the percentage of unpatched copies of XP will increase, perhaps dramatically, and thus increase the number of malware-infested machines spewing forth yet more malware which we who are I.T. professionals have to deal with.

So, no, my "sniping" was not mis-aimed, it's perfectly accurate.

Of course, the lack of security even in fully-patched Windows is part of the reason I am fully employed, so at best, I have mixed feelings about it. Still, I'd rather have to deal more with user education (also part of my job) and less with frantic scrambles to secure against the latest exploit.

But back to the point of this whole thread: I don't personally use AMS, or (knowingly) any other module that has a commercial or semi-commercial basis - yet. But the GPL is very clear on this: One certainly may create a derivative work and charge for distribution, packaging, and support, so long as source code is provided. Furthermore, as soon as I convince $DAY_JOB's VP that FOSS can provide the level of support we need for our intranet, I will be commissioning a module which will be released under the GPL, and I have every expectation that the authors will charge for support. I expect it and I encourage it.

If one can support one's own needs without paying Mith, or Red Hat, or Microsoft, or whomever, then bully! But if not, one has no right to demand cost-free support if it isn't offered. Of course, with closed-source software, you're pretty well screwed if the publisher decides that your problem isn't important (or sufficiently profitable) enough to merit attention.

And that's the bottom line.



53
MorelyDotes
Re: Double Standards

Quote:
Where I draw the line though is with security fixes. I am a adamantly opposed to requiring a donation to fix security holes.


One must assume that you avoid Microsoft products like the plague which they are, then?

There are rumours of legislation which may be proposed in both the USA and Europe which will make charging for access to security patches a criminal offense. I would strongly support such laws. Calling it a "donation" won't change the situation, and prosecutors always go for the low-hanging fruit.

However, for anything else, giving extra care or earlier access to those who have donated is not only perfectly acceptable, it's simple courtesy. One should thank those who have helped one, and that's an obvious way to do it.



54
MorelyDotes
Re: Document Management System (DMS) and Swish

Quote:

rifraff wrote:

For the swish-e database files, is the everyone permission set to at least read?


I'll chmod them to 777, just in case.

Quote:

Also, just to double-check, on the search configuration screen, verify that the swish-e executable is in the path you have set. If you are using windows, don't forget to use something like "c:\swish-e" or whatever your path is.


Windows? Is that one of those things that virus writers use to spread their products? ;) Don't want to start an OS war here, so if anyone has strong religious convictions on the subject of MS stock and the Church of Gates, please forgive me, assume I am a Bohemian anti-capitalist or whatever suits your fancy, and don't bother to flame me, because I Just Don't Care.

This is Debian "Sarge" just for the record. It might make it easier to guess what I'm doing wrong, now that you know that. I'll see if I can find one of those "whatcha got" templates in the Help forums and fill you in completely.

Quote:

Maybe if the path is wrong, swish-e isn't running at all?


Since I can get raw data if I comment out a lot of the php IF sections, I beleive it's running.



55
MorelyDotes
Re: Document Management System (DMS) and Swish

Quote:

rifraff wrote:
In my httpd.conf file, there are 2 lines that set the User and Group to nobody. Find out what your httpd.conf file sets the User to and make sure that user has at least read access to the Swish-E index files. I am thinking that Apache probably executes Swish-E as the "nobody" user and that user requires access to the index files.

Brian

That leaves me still baffled, then. The user and group in Apache are the owner(s) of the swish-e database. I can't imagine what else can be doing this.



56
MorelyDotes
Re: Document Management System (DMS) and Swish

Quote:

rifraff wrote:

It could be a permissions issue. Make sure that Apache has permissions to access the index files.


Thanks, Brian. That would be the userID that's in the httpd.conf file, right? (I don't want to change anything until I'm sure it's the right thing to change.)



57
MorelyDotes
Re: Document Management System (DMS) and Swish

Quote:
Ok, I was finally able to install 2.4.3 and test it. (I was sick last week and wasn't in the office...sorry.)


No, I'm sorry you were ill.

Quote:
The full text search is working fine for me.


It has to be a permissions issue, then. Can you tell me what permissions I *should* have on the repository? Or on the swish-e database files in the repository, in the event they're different?



58
MorelyDotes
PHP curl() support missing

Several modules (inlcuding sophosFlash) require curl support in PHP, which is not included by default. This is an easy fix.

Debian and derivatives:
apt-get install php4-curl

Red Hat/SuSE:
use rpm to install php4-curl-4.3.4-26 or later.



59
MorelyDotes
Re: Commisioned Modules

Quote:

Herko Coomans wrote:
So: yes, XOOPS modules are GPL when they depend on other XOOPS GPL code to function properly or at all.
And no: you don't need to worry about the intellectual property of your work, as the GPL actually protects that for you. You keep that, releasing it as GPL will mean you say to the world 'you can use it how you see fit, but share and share alike!'



Bottom line: If a module (or any other package) is released under the GPL, it is a serious copyright violation for anyone (like, for example, Microsoft) to take the code and re-release it *without* the source code, or to claim licensing restrictions more stringent than the GPL's.



60
MorelyDotes
Re: XOOPS insecure? I think not!

Quote:

If XOOPS was a single, compiled, closed source, fully developed application, the vulnerability of the system could be completely controlled (but still not guaranteed!).


Sure, just like MS Windows, eh?

The huge advantage of open source is that *anyone* can look at it, and if they find a security problem, not only can they tell everyone else, the discoverer can *fix* it (or at least tell someone else who can fix it). And then the fix will be distributed to the rest of the community quickly.

No lobbying to get laws passed to prevent publication of security issues; no delaying patch distribution because admitting there's a problem might interfere with a Marketing campaign - just find it, fix it, and fling it out there.

So, all you 733t coders, if you know there's a problem What have you done about fixing it? Producing Protector is great, but it is not the same as fixing the underlying problem. Herko isn't the only Core Team member; how have you contacted the rest of them? Or have you bothered?




TopTop
« 1 ... 3 4 5 (6) 7 »



Login

Who's Online

158 user(s) are online (99 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 158


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Mar 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits