I'm guessing that the choice of name really had more to do with exposure than anything else. Go to amazon.com and search for webwork... IIRC, there is really only one book on WebWork, Struts on the other hand...
After having used both, I would agree that WebWork was superior, and I am glad the Struts2 is based more on WebWork than Struts1.
> Nonsense. There are too many people who lack the discipline to choose tools and stick to them for a project scope.
I don't know if I'd say that... I would bet that more developers are using frameworks than not. The reason I would suggest that there are too many frameworks is that I firmly believe in the "best tool for the job" mantra, but to really decide which is the best tool, you have to have some experience with each tool before you can decide. If I read your post correctly, it sounds like you use JSF mostly because you know it and you like it... Can you really say it's the best tool for the job? I don't have much experience with JSF, but I do know that it's a component-based framework rather than a Model 2 framework (MVC). Struts2 has a plug-in to integrate JSF, and for a large project, I would imagine that bringing a component-based framework into the mix would be beneficial.
As for the "lack of discipline," I really don't think we can fault developers. Deciding on a framework should be the job of an architect. The developers usually want to know what their task is and what they can use to get it done. Deciding on a framework should be happening long before they are assigned their individual tasks.
Struts 1.x == old and busted, Struts 2.x == gaining ground rather quickly. It is worth checking out if you haven't done so. It has AJAX support built-in, the configuration is a heck of a lot easier than before and there is a plug-in interface to help roll-out new functionality or integration with other libraries (Spring, SiteMesh, GWT, and a bunch more already).
You are definitely right that there are too many frameworks:).
Well, I don't know that it is necessarily very auctionable, but I was one of the people to get an early invite. I got to pick a name when a bunch were still available. I picked techgeek <@> gmailNOSPAM.com. It's not as cool as some of the emails that went on ebay in the beginning before google put a stop to auctioning the accounts, but I figured it was a good one.
While we are talking about it, I would like for everyone that is reading this to quite using my account to sign up for services. This account is getting a few hundred spam messages per day. I thought it would be a good idea to get a cool name on a service that I knew would become popular, but it seems like it is now on every single spam list in the world!
Wait, let me get this straight... You are quoting a work of fiction as your basis to argue that this woman's case is wrong? That's about as shakey as the people who point to the bible as their argument against masturbation
Well, we'll let the courts decide then, but I would assume that her attorneys will bring more than works of fiction to the table.
What I base my opinion on is what I've observed. In my observation, a lot of the people I know who have used Kazaa are not computer professionals or copyright experts but they also would be considered intelligent, educated citizens. They assume that they pay for tangible items, and that digital copies aren't stealing because there is no physical DVD or CD. I am not making a point that they are right or wrong, I am simply pointing out what these people think. In an earlier post, I point out something someone asked me, "If listening to a song on my computer for free is stealing, then is listening to the same song on the radio stealing too?"
To people like the/. crowd this is a ridiculous argument, but to many people they don't understand that stealing information is just as much stealing as the theft of physical items. Do I think it is Kazaa's job to tell people that? I don't, but the courts may. The courts have harshly judged companies in the past (think tobacco industry and prescription drug companies) for not warning people about their products.
I think you are completely missing my point. I agree that people know that stealing is wrong, but what I suggest is that many people may not realize that listening to music they haven't paid for is stealing. Before the massive ad campaigns, I think most people didn't realize that they could be sued for downloading music. I had to explain to a sister-in-law that napster/kazaa was a bad idea because they were stealing and their response went something like: "Well... I listen to it on the radio without paying for it, is that stealing? If not, how is it stealing when I listen on my computer?" This is an educated (master's degree) adult who was confused on the matter.
I don't doubt that people don't steal because it is wrong, but if such a mass of people are stealing could it be possible that they don't realize they are stealing?
Although you may be right, I think there may be some merit to her case. Do we punish the owners of the masses of infected/infested PCs who spew out tons of email? We assume that everyone understands technology and legal issues the way we do, but in fact, I would say that it is very possible (even likely) that most people don't understand the ramifications of using Kazaa. Imagine a teenager showing a grandparent the library of music available online through Kazaa. Having never used the software, I can't say whether or not there are warnings about the dangers of trading copyrighted content, but if the warnings are obscure and not prevalent (like the warning labels of cigarettes) then maybe they should be held accountable.
Have you used a DNS RBL with your server? I use spamhaus.org, the combination of greylisting + spamhaus for RBL has kept my spam lower than ever before. Even if the new botnets honor the RFCs, most of the time, a good rbl is going to find out about them and blacklist them quite quickly.
-Wes
Well, greylisting is suprisingly more effective than most anti-spam measures if you combine it with a decent rbl. The basic premise is that when a message comes in, the server looks at the sender, recipient, and sending host/server. If this is the first time that the greylisting server has encountered this triplet, it tells the sending server to wait X minutes (where X is most likely 5). There are 3 likely outcomes at this point. First outcome, this is a legitimate message from a legitimate server and the waiting period will be honored, then the message will be delivered appropriately and the greylisting server will mark the triplet as legitimate. The second outcome is that the message is coming from a zombie and it will not honor the waiting period because it isn't a fully implemented SMTP server, thus the message will be dropped. Lastly, it is a well-written spam attempt, but within the five minute waiting period, the sending machine will be blacklisted by the rbl to which you subscribe.
Although you may be right that the bad guys will eventually beat it, in the meantime, there are significant waiting periods involved which will likely slowdown the penetration of the spam. This penetration rate is what makes spam profitable. It basically forces servers to build up trust between each other similar to how people build trust with each other... i.e. "I've worked with this person before on this project, so I can believe in him/her" or "I've never worked with this person on this project, so I'll treat them with suspicion until he/she has proven her/himself"
As a parent of a child who shows autistic symptoms, I would like to add that I thought the same thing. My daugher has not been diagnosed with Autism, but we were told by our neuro-psych that she definitely has a form of Pervasive Development Disorder. Comparing Autism to PDD is like comparing Leukemia to Cancer, Leukemia is a form of cancer, but not all cancers are Leukemia. My daughter may not be specifically autistic, but she is definitely PDD (according to our doc, but we are seeking a second opinion). That being said, I also thought that maybe the rate of diagnosis was going up because of movies like 'Rain Man' and celebrities like Doug Flutie pushing autism down our throats. Unfortunately, this really doesn't add up. The rates are increasing recently, although much of the publicity went on up to ten years ago (http://www.autism.org/califepidemic.html). There are many theories of why this is happening, including recently I read that there is a high incidence of autism amongst kids who sustained a head injury during developmental stages of infancy (like a doctor using forceps to deliver a newborn). Although I would agree that many parents often seek attention in the form of exagerrating their children's problems, I don't think that is the case here.
I think I may have recently read somewhere that cellphones may be responsible for more accidents than Drunk Driving. So, why would would we add an interactive app to cell phones, when that app may only be useful when you are driving?
Just good marketting.
I'm old enough to remember the days when Compuserve (before being bought by AOL) had real TCP/IP that allowed Minix users to connect over a modem while AOL had some hacked up custom protocol that worked by replacing all network related apps on windows.
Look who's still around...
That's Marketting with a capital M
or maybe just lazy/ignorant users.
As a former employee of CompuServe which was absorbed by AOL, I think I should weigh in on this issue. CompuServe is still around in multiple incarnations. One is a flanking brand to AOL's traditional dialup product. It was a way for AOL to provide a little bit of a cheaper dial-up with the intention of stemming customers from flocking away because of price. This product is called CompuServe2000 (or CS2K). This product was around before Netscape.net and isn't quite as low-price as Netscape, but is significantly less than traditional AOL. If any of you have ever used it, you would probably notice it is just AOL with a bunch of different logos and colors. However, CompuServe Classic still exists and has quite a few customers especially in places like Europe where people weren't upgrading their computers every year.
As far as Marketing being the reason that AOL is still around, I would disagree. Compuserve was an old company that was started out of an even older company (H&R Block). CS had been around quite a bit longer than many of us have been alive. In fact, I remember celebrating some employees' 30-year anniversaries at CompuServe. IMO, CompuServe eventually lost in the marketplace because they didn't move quick enough to make a fun/happy/colorful service. Being matured and experienced, CompuServe spent their resources making their products and services reliable and trustworthy. Then, the 90s came around and every soccer-mom and junior high student wanted to get Online. And, both AOL and CompuServe had CDs and rebates everywhere you looked. In those days there was a third competitor some of you may remember called Prodigy. Just about everyone with a computer tried all three. As far as glitz, colors, and the rest of the hoo-haa was concerned, AOL won. CompuServe made a last ditch effort called CompuServe WOW! which was too much money spent way too late in the game. It was shortly thereafter that MCI/WorldComm took over and sold the CS client and customers to AOL.
I'm sure I'll be modded down, but even though the/. crowd may think that everything happens because of evil things like Marketing or that companies who do the right (using open protocols, making a service reliable) thing get punished. But, in this case, sticking to open protocols made CompuServes infrastructure much more difficult to expand. I've defended AOL in the past and will continue to do so on this topic. AOL was built long before NATting, they built an infrastructure in the late 80s / early 90s that supported millions of dial-up users that worked. It might not have worked that well, but it worked. Their competition couldn't keep up because they pushed products out the door and jumped on all kinds of opportunities.
You make a valid point, but at the same time, here is how I look at it... You have to pick one of the following:
1. Use APT (or insert any other similar tool [YUM, Portage, etc.]) which is heavily tested by thousands or even millions of developers and allows you to make all packages uniform as far as installation and packaging whether it is a homebrew package or a distro package.
or
2. Homebrew package management. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this isn't a viable option, there are advantages to it. For instance, if you write it, you can make sure it meets all of your site's specific needs. But, you will hit a point where you aren't packaging the core OS components, and each system is actually running two package management systems - 1 the distro package management and 2 your homebrew. This is problematic because any rules in one system aren't honored by rules in the other system. A homebrew system can be architected and things will run smooth, but IMO, 99% of SysAdmins will spend months recreating APT.
Just my.02, you're entitled to your own as well.
Re:I'd patch your book on Linux Patch Management
on
Linux Patch Management
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Really, you are taking me too seriously.
My post was simply meant to make light of someone's attempt to write a book on a topic that seems trivial to me. Although my original comment was quite simple in nature, I was meaning to point to a versatile set of tools. IIRC, debian and the APT tools were developed because of Ian Murdoch's need to keep the Pixar render cluster up to date. Any 'debian in the datacenter' SysAdmin can tell you that the entire suite of APT tools is very handy. RedHat's recent attempt with RHN is nice as well, but from an evolution standpoint is still a bit behind APT, and Gentoo's Portage is nice as well, but, APT still has a bit of a head start on many of these tools.
One thing you do not mention is simply setting up your own repository. Depending on the size of your installation, this could be quite beneficial. I worked one job that required a 25ish-node datacenter with consistent installations of Linux. We set up our own repository using the packages we needed, and then left it up to the QE dep't to test new packages as they were released and they gave us the word when packages were ready to be pushed to our repository. Worked out quite nice and only required that we have a custom sources.list file. It was quite easy to maintain a uniform installation of Apache, and when I left, revisions of our application were being pushed with our APT repository.
Before the flames start, I want to throw in my two cents.
I have recently rebuild a few of our servers and noticed the high price of tape drives. It seems like you have to spend a grand to get anything decent. So, I've started to look around at what's available online. I've found livevault.com and evault.com. Both are offering between 5 and 10 gigabytes for between $100 and $200 a month. So, if I want 100 Gig, the only viable option is to spend ~$2,000 (hardware and software), pare down what I am backing up and send it off-site for ~$2,000 a year. Or, homegrow some other solution. What homegrown solutions have people come up with that can backup a heterogeneous environment?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing that the choice of name really had more to do with exposure than anything else. Go to amazon.com and search for webwork... IIRC, there is really only one book on WebWork, Struts on the other hand...
After having used both, I would agree that WebWork was superior, and I am glad the Struts2 is based more on WebWork than Struts1.
> Nonsense. There are too many people who lack the discipline to choose tools and stick to them for a project scope.
I don't know if I'd say that... I would bet that more developers are using frameworks than not. The reason I would suggest that there are too many frameworks is that I firmly believe in the "best tool for the job" mantra, but to really decide which is the best tool, you have to have some experience with each tool before you can decide. If I read your post correctly, it sounds like you use JSF mostly because you know it and you like it... Can you really say it's the best tool for the job? I don't have much experience with JSF, but I do know that it's a component-based framework rather than a Model 2 framework (MVC). Struts2 has a plug-in to integrate JSF, and for a large project, I would imagine that bringing a component-based framework into the mix would be beneficial.
As for the "lack of discipline," I really don't think we can fault developers. Deciding on a framework should be the job of an architect. The developers usually want to know what their task is and what they can use to get it done. Deciding on a framework should be happening long before they are assigned their individual tasks.
Struts 1.x == old and busted, Struts 2.x == gaining ground rather quickly. It is worth checking out if you haven't done so. It has AJAX support built-in, the configuration is a heck of a lot easier than before and there is a plug-in interface to help roll-out new functionality or integration with other libraries (Spring, SiteMesh, GWT, and a bunch more already).
:).
You are definitely right that there are too many frameworks
Have you looked at Struts 2.x? I know it will sound like I'm self-marketing (which I am), but check out my series of articles -
wantii.com
oh... that kind of weed
I am going to hunt this thing down and destroy every last ounce of it's evil metal body...
Right after I get up off the couch
Well, I don't know that it is necessarily very auctionable, but I was one of the people to get an early invite. I got to pick a name when a bunch were still available. I picked techgeek <@> gmailNOSPAM.com. It's not as cool as some of the emails that went on ebay in the beginning before google put a stop to auctioning the accounts, but I figured it was a good one.
While we are talking about it, I would like for everyone that is reading this to quite using my account to sign up for services. This account is getting a few hundred spam messages per day. I thought it would be a good idea to get a cool name on a service that I knew would become popular, but it seems like it is now on every single spam list in the world!
that I had ebayed my gmail account... I wonder if google will be changing the domain name.
It is a bit hard to jump back into Slackware... The long hiatus a while back left me seeking other distros which I have stayed loyal to.
Wait, let me get this straight... You are quoting a work of fiction as your basis to argue that this woman's case is wrong? That's about as shakey as the people who point to the bible as their argument against masturbation
/. crowd this is a ridiculous argument, but to many people they don't understand that stealing information is just as much stealing as the theft of physical items. Do I think it is Kazaa's job to tell people that? I don't, but the courts may. The courts have harshly judged companies in the past (think tobacco industry and prescription drug companies) for not warning people about their products.
Well, we'll let the courts decide then, but I would assume that her attorneys will bring more than works of fiction to the table.
What I base my opinion on is what I've observed. In my observation, a lot of the people I know who have used Kazaa are not computer professionals or copyright experts but they also would be considered intelligent, educated citizens. They assume that they pay for tangible items, and that digital copies aren't stealing because there is no physical DVD or CD. I am not making a point that they are right or wrong, I am simply pointing out what these people think. In an earlier post, I point out something someone asked me, "If listening to a song on my computer for free is stealing, then is listening to the same song on the radio stealing too?"
To people like the
I never yelled "There should be a law!"
I think you are completely missing my point. I agree that people know that stealing is wrong, but what I suggest is that many people may not realize that listening to music they haven't paid for is stealing. Before the massive ad campaigns, I think most people didn't realize that they could be sued for downloading music. I had to explain to a sister-in-law that napster/kazaa was a bad idea because they were stealing and their response went something like: "Well... I listen to it on the radio without paying for it, is that stealing? If not, how is it stealing when I listen on my computer?" This is an educated (master's degree) adult who was confused on the matter.
I don't doubt that people don't steal because it is wrong, but if such a mass of people are stealing could it be possible that they don't realize they are stealing?
Although you may be right, I think there may be some merit to her case. Do we punish the owners of the masses of infected/infested PCs who spew out tons of email? We assume that everyone understands technology and legal issues the way we do, but in fact, I would say that it is very possible (even likely) that most people don't understand the ramifications of using Kazaa. Imagine a teenager showing a grandparent the library of music available online through Kazaa. Having never used the software, I can't say whether or not there are warnings about the dangers of trading copyrighted content, but if the warnings are obscure and not prevalent (like the warning labels of cigarettes) then maybe they should be held accountable.
Have you used a DNS RBL with your server? I use spamhaus.org, the combination of greylisting + spamhaus for RBL has kept my spam lower than ever before. Even if the new botnets honor the RFCs, most of the time, a good rbl is going to find out about them and blacklist them quite quickly. -Wes
Well, greylisting is suprisingly more effective than most anti-spam measures if you combine it with a decent rbl. The basic premise is that when a message comes in, the server looks at the sender, recipient, and sending host/server. If this is the first time that the greylisting server has encountered this triplet, it tells the sending server to wait X minutes (where X is most likely 5). There are 3 likely outcomes at this point. First outcome, this is a legitimate message from a legitimate server and the waiting period will be honored, then the message will be delivered appropriately and the greylisting server will mark the triplet as legitimate. The second outcome is that the message is coming from a zombie and it will not honor the waiting period because it isn't a fully implemented SMTP server, thus the message will be dropped. Lastly, it is a well-written spam attempt, but within the five minute waiting period, the sending machine will be blacklisted by the rbl to which you subscribe.
Although you may be right that the bad guys will eventually beat it, in the meantime, there are significant waiting periods involved which will likely slowdown the penetration of the spam. This penetration rate is what makes spam profitable. It basically forces servers to build up trust between each other similar to how people build trust with each other... i.e. "I've worked with this person before on this project, so I can believe in him/her" or "I've never worked with this person on this project, so I'll treat them with suspicion until he/she has proven her/himself"
Wait, isn't it left, right, left, right, up, down, up, down, B, A, B, A, Start? I hear that will add 30 extra votes for the party of your choice.
As a parent of a child who shows autistic symptoms, I would like to add that I thought the same thing. My daugher has not been diagnosed with Autism, but we were told by our neuro-psych that she definitely has a form of Pervasive Development Disorder. Comparing Autism to PDD is like comparing Leukemia to Cancer, Leukemia is a form of cancer, but not all cancers are Leukemia. My daughter may not be specifically autistic, but she is definitely PDD (according to our doc, but we are seeking a second opinion). That being said, I also thought that maybe the rate of diagnosis was going up because of movies like 'Rain Man' and celebrities like Doug Flutie pushing autism down our throats. Unfortunately, this really doesn't add up. The rates are increasing recently, although much of the publicity went on up to ten years ago (http://www.autism.org/califepidemic.html). There are many theories of why this is happening, including recently I read that there is a high incidence of autism amongst kids who sustained a head injury during developmental stages of infancy (like a doctor using forceps to deliver a newborn). Although I would agree that many parents often seek attention in the form of exagerrating their children's problems, I don't think that is the case here.
I think I may have recently read somewhere that cellphones may be responsible for more accidents than Drunk Driving. So, why would would we add an interactive app to cell phones, when that app may only be useful when you are driving?
Me Too!!!!
<G>
Me too!!!!!
<G> sorry, couldn't resist...
As far as Marketing being the reason that AOL is still around, I would disagree. Compuserve was an old company that was started out of an even older company (H&R Block). CS had been around quite a bit longer than many of us have been alive. In fact, I remember celebrating some employees' 30-year anniversaries at CompuServe. IMO, CompuServe eventually lost in the marketplace because they didn't move quick enough to make a fun/happy/colorful service. Being matured and experienced, CompuServe spent their resources making their products and services reliable and trustworthy. Then, the 90s came around and every soccer-mom and junior high student wanted to get Online. And, both AOL and CompuServe had CDs and rebates everywhere you looked. In those days there was a third competitor some of you may remember called Prodigy. Just about everyone with a computer tried all three. As far as glitz, colors, and the rest of the hoo-haa was concerned, AOL won. CompuServe made a last ditch effort called CompuServe WOW! which was too much money spent way too late in the game. It was shortly thereafter that MCI/WorldComm took over and sold the CS client and customers to AOL.
I'm sure I'll be modded down, but even though the
You make a valid point, but at the same time, here is how I look at it... You have to pick one of the following:
.02, you're entitled to your own as well.
1. Use APT (or insert any other similar tool [YUM, Portage, etc.]) which is heavily tested by thousands or even millions of developers and allows you to make all packages uniform as far as installation and packaging whether it is a homebrew package or a distro package.
or
2. Homebrew package management. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this isn't a viable option, there are advantages to it. For instance, if you write it, you can make sure it meets all of your site's specific needs. But, you will hit a point where you aren't packaging the core OS components, and each system is actually running two package management systems - 1 the distro package management and 2 your homebrew. This is problematic because any rules in one system aren't honored by rules in the other system. A homebrew system can be architected and things will run smooth, but IMO, 99% of SysAdmins will spend months recreating APT.
Just my
Really, you are taking me too seriously.
My post was simply meant to make light of someone's attempt to write a book on a topic that seems trivial to me. Although my original comment was quite simple in nature, I was meaning to point to a versatile set of tools. IIRC, debian and the APT tools were developed because of Ian Murdoch's need to keep the Pixar render cluster up to date. Any 'debian in the datacenter' SysAdmin can tell you that the entire suite of APT tools is very handy. RedHat's recent attempt with RHN is nice as well, but from an evolution standpoint is still a bit behind APT, and Gentoo's Portage is nice as well, but, APT still has a bit of a head start on many of these tools.
One thing you do not mention is simply setting up your own repository. Depending on the size of your installation, this could be quite beneficial. I worked one job that required a 25ish-node datacenter with consistent installations of Linux. We set up our own repository using the packages we needed, and then left it up to the QE dep't to test new packages as they were released and they gave us the word when packages were ready to be pushed to our repository. Worked out quite nice and only required that we have a custom sources.list file. It was quite easy to maintain a uniform installation of Apache, and when I left, revisions of our application were being pushed with our APT repository.
Chapter 1:
apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade
Before the flames start, I want to throw in my two cents.
I have recently rebuild a few of our servers and noticed the high price of tape drives. It seems like you have to spend a grand to get anything decent. So, I've started to look around at what's available online. I've found livevault.com and evault.com. Both are offering between 5 and 10 gigabytes for between $100 and $200 a month. So, if I want 100 Gig, the only viable option is to spend ~$2,000 (hardware and software), pare down what I am backing up and send it off-site for ~$2,000 a year. Or, homegrow some other solution. What homegrown solutions have people come up with that can backup a heterogeneous environment?
In other words, you want FreeBSD.
Well, BSD is dead, and even though Debian Sarge might be frozen, it is possible to resurrect it later... Just ask any cryogenics professional.