Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

WinBuilder development should go!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
105 replies to this topic

#51 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 15469 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:08 AM

But I am with you to get rid of this stupid and childish post games all around occupying time.


Look, Lancelot :cheers:, it's not like brain surgery, if you want to get rid of this stupid and childish post games it's easy.

JUST STOP IT! ;)

BTW I don't understand the logic behind your ramblings about galapo.net. :)

@Galapo
Please, you have to keep Wonko's posts separated from Nuno's they are two different things:
  • the first are the (more or less grumpy ;)) opinions and perplexities of a "common" user, little more than what you may get from a poll
  • the second are the (more or less logic ;)) opinions of the board owner and "father" of Winbuilder

The relevance (or "weight") of the first ones is near to 0, the relevance of the second ones is very near to 10 in a 0÷10 scale.

;)
Wonko

#52 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:16 AM

this is a "bugmenot" account I found, I use sometimes when forgot my ufd with me.

That's ok, I like Stef thought I'd recommend getting one of these in the future: Posted Image


or whatever you like, a temporary ftp account may also fit better....
Only 1 day is enough to leave something useful which would hopefully not give reason to PSC you and others write lies and stupid logic anymore.

Yes, I agree that logic is mostly a waste of time but sometimes it can be useful.

For example, creating an FTP account even if temporary will:
a ) require installing an FTP service on the server
b ) require my time configuring the service
c ) require being removed after you upload everything

Logically, I assume that even thought you say "1 day", I'm sure that you will inevitably need to change something again in the near future and then I'll have to go through steps a, b, c again which is time consuming.

I can also assume as logical facts that:
- There is not enough enough room on dropbox to hold LiveXP size
- We had troubles in the past when trying to use dropbox to share files
- We can't use multiple dropbox accounts on the server.

-----------

So, using the results from considering a factual logic we can now resort to popular proverbs as a never-ending source of wisdom and inspiration.

For example, there is a saying in my country (perhaps yours as well) that goes like:

"If you have a difficult and time consuming task to perform, give it to a lazy guy that he will surely find the easiest and quickest way of getting it done."

On this case, I'm the lazy guy and you're giving me the task of updating your project server.

So, I would propose the following solution:
- Ask galapo to create a new user on his server with limited SSH permissions;
- This user can only read files on the LiveXP server;
- Give the login details of this user to Nuno;
- Nuno sets up a cron job using scp to copy files from remote server onto boot land server at each 24 hours

You and Galapo can now update the server on your own machine and the results appear at boot land after some hours without giving me any additional work.

Mission accomplished team! :cheers:

Then, please, for goodness sake don't call some winbuilder.exe oddity a "release candidate" if in fact you don't really mean it.

Actually, Peter is the person responsible for all the pre-versions and I'm the person who only signs out the new stable versions when I'm happy with the result. I don't call them RC, I commonly call them all as "unstable" and "I'm not fit for your production environment" type of releases but that's just my opinion.

One of the concerns that I've heard from Peter is that betas got ignored and he only hears feedback when a new binary "looks" serious like a RC.

He has been working for free all these years. Getting feedback from users is a little pay back that keeps him happy and motivated to keep on moving. Either right or wrong, pushing away the only guy that was still solving bug reports doesn't get us very far, does it? ;)

I'm still confused about this development model and what you actually mean

This model is a new type of rocket science: http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10500

Peter was confused, Galapo was confused after reading that link so I guess it was better to keep on with the WinBuilder 075 beta 19abc type of releases that are surely more understandable to everyone else.

fundamental syntax of the winbuilder engine being repeatedly altered, script developers not being included in the decision making

This is fundamental yada, yada. It's been 8 months since 080 release and at the current level of motivation there won't exist syntax changes ever again, are we all happy now?

IMHO, some script developers were too involved in decision making and now we all pay the price for this decision that keeps us away from any attempts of improvement either in winbuilder.exe or new wb projects.

You guys lead the future, don't let us down. ;)

#53 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:54 AM

So, I would propose the following solution:
- Ask galapo to create a new user on his server with limited SSH permissions;

Well, he can ask but unfortunately it can't be granted. I don't have ssh access myself.

- Nuno sets up a cron job using scp to copy files from remote server onto boot land server at each 24 hours

Also, cron jobs aren't allowed to run on the server.

So the solution as proposed isn't workable.

IMHO, some script developers were too involved in decision making and now we all pay the price for this decision that keeps us away from any attempts of improvement either in winbuilder.exe or new wb projects.

Peter was the only script developer I know of who made actual decisions. The rest of us have been wanting to be involved, especially as it relates to the issue of changing fundamental syntax rules, but this wasn't done. Nuno, that's what all the fuss has been for the last number of months. That's what I've been raising. That's what Lancelot has been raising. And that's what paraglider also raised at significant points too.

Remember what you initally said:

So, winbuilder.exe hasn't stopped because of LiveXP developers. It stopped because we failed on what was most important: listening to the community.


You guys lead the future, don't let us down. :cheers:

Um, how can we lead the future of winbuilder coding when winbuilder isn't opensource? That's like asking a paralysed man to walk -- it takes a miracle and I'm no miracle worker.

Regards,
Galapo.

#54 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:02 PM

Peter was the only script developer I know of who made actual decisions.

Please count how many suggestions you made which as WINBUILDER DEVELOPER I implemented in WinBuilder.
But please: As SCRIPT DEVELOPER I'm really the ONLY person deciding which is done in MY scripts!

Peter

#55 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 21 September 2010 - 08:23 PM

Please count how many suggestions you made which as WINBUILDER DEVELOPER I implemented in WinBuilder.

Hi Peter,

Again you miss the point. Of course I made feature suggestions, some of which you implemented. Thanks indeed, I've always appreciated that!

But the point is that script developers haven't been involved in decisions relating to fundamantal syntax changes. They are just changed and expected to be complied with, necessitating project upgrades and script updates.

So since you've still missed the real issue, let me repeat again what I and others haven't liked: fundamental syntax being repeatedly altered, script developers not being included in the decision making regarding this, and not being given adequate reasons for why the changes where necessary in the first place.

It's never been about features -- it's always been about script syntax changing at a whim.

Regards,
Galapo.

#56 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 September 2010 - 08:44 PM

Hi Peter,

Again you miss the point. Of course I made feature suggestions, some of which you implemented. Thanks indeed, I've always appreciated that!

But the point is that script developers haven't been involved in decisions relating to fundamantal syntax changes. They are just changed and expected to be complied with, necessitating project upgrades and script updates.

So since you've still missed the real issue, let me repeat again what I and others haven't liked: fundamental syntax being repeatedly altered, script developers not being included in the decision making regarding this, and not being given adequate reasons for why the changes where necessary in the first place.

It's never been about features -- it's always been about script syntax changing at a whim.

Regards,
Galapo.

Please allow me to miss as many points as I want because you speak about history. I'm looking into future.

Peter :cheers:

#57 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:00 PM

Hi Peter,

Yep, deliberately missing points is your perrogative.

I'm only replying to misleading statements so that others are aware this has always been about fundamental script sytax rules always changing, necessitating constant project upgrades and script updates if they were to maintain compatibility with a new winbuilder version.

Regards,
Galapo.

#58 Max_Real Qnx

Max_Real Qnx

    Gold Member

  • Patrician
  • 1382 posts
  • Location:Istanbul
  • Interests:To be or not to be that is the question.
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:02 PM

I think the projects should be compatible with the new version of WinBuilder.
VistaPE 11 do not work with new Winbuilder, I've made a new projects (VistaPe Leopard projects).
I think as you do in adapting to new projects, no need to talk too much about this issue.
People are waiting for new and better projects. We must not waste time by discussing. Work work work....

Best regards :cheers:

#59 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:55 PM

I think the projects should be compatible with the new version of WinBuilder.
VistaPE 11 do not work with new Winbuilder, I've made a new projects (VistaPe Leopard projects).
I think as you do in adapting to new projects, no need to talk too much about this issue.
People are waiting for new and better projects. We must not waste time by discussing. Work work work....

Best regards :cheers:

Please stay careful: The new version is 080. Everything above 080 is not official!

Peter

#60 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:16 PM

Well, he can ask but unfortunately it can't be granted. I don't have ssh access myself

Do you have any chance of moving to another host?

If not, let's keep on thinking about possible solutions. For example, we could try to use PHP to create a zipped file with all the subdirs and files.

Then on my side I can:
- call your PHP script to compress files;
- grab the zipped file with wget;
- unpack it to the respective folder.

An example PHP file can be found here: http://www.ramui.com...-directory.html

Can you test and see if your server supports the Zip extension?


------------

Also, cron jobs aren't allowed to run on the server.

Don't worry about that. SCP or wget would run from our server, so the cron job also runs strictly from our side.

:cheers:

#61 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:29 PM

Do you have any chance of moving to another host?

Unfortunately no because my financial situation does not accommodate this.

Regarding php and zip compression, yes that works fine and I'm already using this for personal things.

However, again, my financial situation means that my server situation isn't perfect in that bandwidth is only a notional unlimited account because heavy use will actually see me asked to move to another host. So I'm not in favour of downloading the entire project by zip file again and again in case a script has been altered to keep servers in sync. Better to just download individual updated scripts or altered files seperately rather than the entire project by zip file.

Regards,
Galapo.

#62 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 September 2010 - 01:10 AM

However, again, my financial situation means that my server situation isn't perfect in that bandwidth is only a notional unlimited account because heavy use will actually see me asked to move to another host. So I'm not in favour of downloading the entire project by zip file again and again in case a script has been altered to keep servers in sync. Better to just download individual updated scripts or altered files seperately rather than the entire project by zip file.


Don't worry. By experience I can assure you that downloading one single zip file at intervals of 24 hours will hardly be noticeable nor cause strain in the server machine if the file is kept below 1 gigabyte of size.

:cheers:

#63 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 22 September 2010 - 02:40 AM

Hi Nuno,

What I meant was the accumulated bandwidth this adds. Better to find a solution which downloads only changed/updated scripts and files rather than the entire project each time. Exactly like what BlueLife's BLExactServer program published on these forums does.

Regards,
Galapo.

#64 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 September 2010 - 03:26 PM

Well.. in that I'd suggest that you do a php script that I can place on my server side that you can use to upload a given file onto your space.

The original version of the file directory browser script that I've sent you had support for this, however, it has no security built inside.

If you find one, do test and send it over my way.

:ph34r:

#65 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 22 September 2010 - 11:17 PM

But what to do about larger scripts, say those which are 20-30mb? Php can balk at uploading such sizes.

I think the solution would be to provide ftp access with username and password that can't be brute-forced. What do you think?

Thanks,
Galapo.

#66 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 September 2010 - 09:26 AM

I think the solution would be to provide ftp access with username and password that can't be brute-forced. What do you think

No more FTP.

If you have unlimited bandwidth, 100~300Mb per 24 hours exchanged between servers is peanuts, especially when boot land is sending over 100Gb per day to the rest of the world.

There was a lot of effort to harden our server, I won't open another service and port just to save some Mb's and put everyone else at risk.

#67 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 23 September 2010 - 09:43 AM

Hi Nuno,

I'm not on a 100gb/day plan, nowhere even close to that. Too much usage on my plan will see me be asked to move to another host. I can't risk that possibility as I don't have the financial means to cover this since I'm a low income earner in a sole income family with three other mouths to feed (and another due in January!).

Regards,
Galapo.

#68 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 September 2010 - 10:26 AM

- Boot Land server uses more than 100Gb a day.
- Your server does not use 100Gb a day nor I mentioned it would need to.

If 24 hours is too much for your server, do it in 2, 3, 4 days or weekly intervals instead. Just don't ask me to do things on our side that will expose the server to attacks.

I don't have the financial means to cover this

Why are you spending money at all? There are plenty of free web servers out there. Just google for "free host" and you find some options like:

http://www.zymic.com/free-web-hosting/
http://www.freehostia.com/

Beside being free, they provide enough bandwidth for your current needs.

#69 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 23 September 2010 - 10:47 AM

Why are you spending money at all? There are plenty of free web servers out there.

Because for one they don't provide enough bandwidth. zymic.com provides 50gb/month, while freehostia.com provide 6gb/month. I'm currently averaging about 10gb/day off the LiveXP sub-domain on my server, so that pushes it beyond these free hosts.

Regards,
Galapo.

#70 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 September 2010 - 11:21 AM

Are you for real? :ph34r:

If LiveXP is going to be hosted back at boot land servers then why are you saying that you'll be continuing to spend over 10Gb a day? :cheers:

#71 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 23 September 2010 - 11:31 AM

Because I'm hosting other content as well.

It still makes sense to me to have LiveXP hosted at the original livexp.boot-land.net, not least because this is hard-coded into WB executable and appears when updates server is unavailable.

Anyway, as I said before the better solution is one which downloads only changed/updated scripts and files rather than the entire project each time. Exactly like what BlueLife's BLExactServer program published on these forums does.

Regards,
Galapo.

#72 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 15469 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:05 PM

Anyway, as I said before the better solution is one which downloads only changed/updated scripts and files rather than the entire project each time. E

:cheers:
:ph34r:

....

.....


This is more appropriate to what happened:

Welcome to Winbuilder!
Actually you have alredy runned Winbuilder for a couple of minutes, sorry for the delay in welcoming you.
In the meantime, without you knowing, we connected to the Internet and downloaded from it whatever pleased us.
Since we think you are a no-good-n00b, we already pre-selected a few hundreds of megabytes of files that you should download by pressing the Download button (the one in bottom left corner with a green arrow on it).
Probably you are not interested in "x project" and only interested in "y project", but we do not care about bandwith, nor about your HD occupation, and not even about the time you will lose waiting for the downloading of a quantity of stuff you will probably NEVER use.
On this section you can download scripts and projects directly to your disk. In case of doubt you can read the quick guide or perhaps visit the tutorials section to learn more about wb. If you need help please post a message on the support section.

.....


At least here in Italy a number of people have dial-up or slowish connections and, expecially mobile users in remote areas do have connections where the price paid is connected to the amount of Mb you download, I find this "Download all, use only what you need" philosophy not particularly friendly to them.
....



:cheers:
Wonko

#73 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:21 PM

As far as I understood, Wonko, the two guys are speaking about UPLOADING to the bootland server.

But that brought me to an idea:

Currently I'm working with UpToolEx which helps to upload projects to the server.

Currently it compares the actual scripts with the last uploaded ones, and decides which ones should be brought into an upload batch.

I think it is a question of some (Latin) minutes to use Galapo's server as 'Actual scripts', compare with Nunos local 'Upload Clone' and write a batch, Nuno can start manually or by cron or whatelse.

Peter

EDIT: AFAIK, Nuno does not have a Windows machine and therefore cannot run UpToolsEx. But the tool can be run on Galapo's machine and the batch sent to Nuno.

#74 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10565 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:22 PM

Because I'm hosting other content as well.


What the heck. You mentioned specifically the liveXP subdomain. Why can't you register a free host server just for LiveXP.. :cheers:


At least here in Italy a number of people have dial-up or slowish connections

This is meant to copy files between two servers where it is typical to exchange 100Mb of files under a minute.


Anyway, as I said before the better solution

Then give me the script to do so (I've also mentioned this previously)

I'm getting tired Galapo. Why do you keep complicating something that should be simple?

#75 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 15469 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:32 PM

As far as I understood, Wonko, the two guys are speaking about UPLOADING to the bootland server.


Sure ;), it's just a different phylosophy:
copy/transfer/download/upload/whatever EVERYTHING vs. copy/transfer/download/upload/whatever ONLY the BARELY needed things (those that changed or that are needed)

It applies to ANY FIELD, I am notoriously cheap ;) and since years fighting battles against bloat in the perfectly vain :cheers: attempt to contribute in limiting the increasing of entropy.

Unrelated (but not much) examples:
http://www.911cd.net...o...20983&st=37
http://www.msfn.org/...howtopic=145209
http://www.msfn.org/...o...45209&st=11

If you want, this is actually being "green" or "eco-friendly", any single d@mn byte you "play" with, it will consume some (very small amount of) electricity.

:)
Wonko




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users