| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
CSDB as a "released at" field?
right,
Celtic has asked me to post the following for further discussion on here:
in the same manner as the Compunet entry has been added as a "released at" option, another addition could be made as "CSDB" to denote the modern entries that have been/will be first released directly onto CSDB and not the web/scene/parties/compos. to reflect CSDBs position in the current scene as CNET was in the past.
DISCUSS PLEASE
the admins will make a decision based on the discussion.
i will abstain from the discussion because i raised the question.
Steve |
|
| |
Sixx
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 229 |
There is still active scene FTP's, i think you have to take those into consideration as well. We're one of the groups that "always" upload to Digital Dungeon first for instance. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Then add digital dungeon as an option.... There's supposedly a button for any user to do so. As Ste said in the other thread, this is supposed to be a full and accurate database of C64 releases yet some stuff has released at this or that party and everything else seems to appear from the ether.
I think any valid "released at" should be added for accuracy.
|
| |
Sander
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 496 |
Next to Compunet and events, I guess boards should be added too, finally giving them some weight here.
But adding CSDb to that list makes me wonder how far should we take it? There're probably some productions first released on 'IRC' or 'Lemon64' for example. I feel only CSDb is the exception here.
Also adding FTP's to the list makes a bit of sense to me, however listing those would've very limited added value for me. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
compunet as release origin makes sence.... csdb on the other hand not so much.
consequently, since csdb is an archive- and not a release site, we should establish a rule that a release can not be added if it isnt either X weeks old or has already been released on a scene site. then also "released at TDD" makes a little bit of sense.
ie, instead of petting those on the back that abuse csdb as a release site, i'd rather support those that do not (hy sixx =P) and encourage the others to use other means of releasing.
(personally i think that disallowing anything that wasnt atleast transfered through punter once sounds like a damn good idea =P)
although like sander, i see little value in having this info listed to me (and i also cant imagine someone giving a rats ass on updating it). |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 677 |
I'd welcome a rule that only allows for CSDb entries if they were previously released at a party or antidote :) |
| |
Stainless Steel
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 966 |
While i dont care much for a "released at csdb" category, i do however think the "must be released someplace else" rule is a load of <insert profanity here>.
I was under the impression "Released at" would be "at an event". Compunet & CSDb hardly qualify as "Events" do they? |
| |
The Communist
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 485 |
Stainless:
Quoting STE'86OK i have added "compunet" as an "event" on the "released at" list.
strictly speaking it is closer to a BBS but in order to set a "released at" tag it has to be an event AFAIK.
COMPUNET (CNET)
Steve
from http://csdb.dk/forums/?roomid=5&topicid=85270#85295 |
| |
Stainless Steel
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 966 |
Sure, but still my definition of an event is somewhat different.
Ofcourse i guess in the broadest sense, Compunet could be described as an "Event" in c64 history :-D
For this purpose i'd say something like searchable tagwords would be better suited. |
| |
Shadow
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 355 |
Quote: compunet as release origin makes sence.... csdb on the other hand not so much.
consequently, since csdb is an archive- and not a release site, we should establish a rule that a release can not be added if it isnt either X weeks old or has already been released on a scene site. then also "released at TDD" makes a little bit of sense.
ie, instead of petting those on the back that abuse csdb as a release site, i'd rather support those that do not (hy sixx =P) and encourage the others to use other means of releasing.
(personally i think that disallowing anything that wasnt atleast transfered through punter once sounds like a damn good idea =P)
although like sander, i see little value in having this info listed to me (and i also cant imagine someone giving a rats ass on updating it).
WTF? "Abusing" CSDB as a release site?
If I do some small prod that isn't released at a party or other compo, CSDB is the natural place to release it.
Most of the guys interested in C64 demos stops by here, so of course this is where I upload it! |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
Ok, my input on this:
After choosing "release type", for example:
"C64 one-file demo"
A list of checkboxes appear, where it was released.
example: "compunet", "party", "bbs"
when choosing party or bbs etc, then a list of those come up.
If you look at the way that nVIDIA has a menu to find your gfx
card drivers, by selecting something, then an additional
list comes up next to it, and one after that, i think this is a good and easy way to do it. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
No matter if one likes it or not, and no matter what the rules say, it is a fact that people have used CSDb as a major release site for ages by now. |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
Not to completely derail the thread, but this discussion is one of many about functionality in CSDB.
The mods/admin, Perff etc. have limited time to code and redesign, and often the same and the same "do this, or why not ?" discussions pop up.
We have 10 years of CSDB now, and any system has a life cycle, that includes, to be effecttive, that it be redesign, based on the years of experience with it, those learned from that period.
By doing a new design, mainly what functionalities are available, take the 10 years of learned experience, AND moving the whole stuff to implementation in an open source CMS (Joomla, Drupal etc.) - those with initiative and time, could help to maintain, build and improve a CSDB 2.0 in the future.
Doing a rebuilded CSDB, by hand code, requires a dedicated developer, and maintaining after that. If an overhauled CSDB is made in an open source CMS, it becomes easier for everybody. Same way as people make demos on a pc, because crossdev is easier/mor effective, i think its time to move away from systems, that only 1-2 persons know everything about, and are the only ones that can maintain and improve.
My 2 cents :)
If this would happen, i would be glad to spend a lot of time learning to use and master such a CMS.
Remember, even if its a CMS, like Joomla, a php coder, can always do his own code in it. Its not a limitation, its an opportunity to do more things, faster and more "this is not a hack" way. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
using joomla would be more like the "this is how to get hacked" way though =) |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Moving from custom code tailored to the needed speed and functionality to open-source cms? How that would help? Even the best opensource cms would have to be heavily modified for the main part of this project, that is the DATA and various ways of using it. Of course the idea isn't completely stupid, if we talk about frameworks. Recoding this to some decent framework would proably be good, but still this is not a money-making project, and rework of such scale would need investment of many unpaid hours. It could help maybe, if the database was open for data mining, then some team of developers using the decided framework could make a new frontend around it. But I'm not saying this is needed. Only thing there is really need for is speed up optimization of CSDB, it sometimes slows down. |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
once again i made a constructive suggestion, and once again the only answer we get from groepaz is just negative, not discussing it at all just saying "its to be hacked" etc.
how in any way are people supposed to discuss solutions and angles on anything, when he does this every time ?
this is the last constructive idea i will ever give, i will waste no more time ever on that.
from now im just a user, and all my creative ideas and inputs, are no more, not on csdb anyway.
Creamd's answer is more fair, he "discuss", reply to what was said.
firing groepaz is the best you can do.
the end
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:this is the last constructive idea i will ever give, i will waste no more time ever on that.
from now im just a user, and all my creative ideas and inputs, are no more, not on csdb anyway.
and this time you really mean it? |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Hasn't taken a certain moderator long to drop back into his old ways tho has it?
after all furore he caused 2 weeks ago.
nothing constructively discussed, just dismissed offhand as usual.
tut tut. BAD groepaz! |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2928 |
Quoting SIDwavethis is the last constructive idea i will ever give, i will waste no more time ever on that.
my prayers to the StatueTardis have been answered! \o/
Quoting SIDwavefiring groepaz is the best you can do.
Please "hire" more like groepaz, this place needs more moderators with a steady head and less whining. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Quoting Groepazand this time you really mean it?
Your reply is off topic, you should delete it. If you cannot post constructive on topic comments then you shouldn't be posting.
*On topic*
The root cause of the problem brought up by the original post is the code running the site. Moving to a more well known CMS where the bugs have been fixed makes sense when there is a growing backlog of changes in the existing code or where the existing code is having to be patched by someone with limited resources. In that case it makes sense to utilise more than one person who can do the job. So from a software design and maintenance point of view it makes sense. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Following on from my previous post...
I cannot see any harm in releasing the database for this site along with source code.
Obviously some tables need to be removed for account information and private messages. But I would wager a large proportion of the database and most of the database hits are for the publicly available information anyway.
It would be very instructive to see where the slow code for this site is. As CreaMD says " it sometimes slows down".
Certainly releasing the source with the public database information would allow any prospective developer using a CMS of their choice to run performance tests and compare the current code with new CMS code.
Page access logs, excluding IPs and certain private pages, would need to be made public too. To help build a picture of the expected load for the site, to help any performance testing efforts.
Two heads are better than one and all that.
Can anyone provide a good reason not to release all the public information as described above?
|
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Martin, there is no reason not to release that, and I'm sure Perff will do it whenever he decides to do it. I vaguely recall someone speaking about having the database exported for backup somehwere anyway. But I don't know if that was CSDB or something else.
And by the way, this thread was about "released at" field and not about CMS and improvements etc, so please be so kind and stop spreading your foolish quarell with Groepaz to new threads. |
| |
McMeatLoaf
Registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 108 |
CreaMD: Speaking of backups, how often is the database backed up? A hard drive crash IMHO would be an absolutely horrific scenario, considering the huge mass of scene material here at stake...
(Sorry for hijacking the thread) |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Dunno how often, I'm just mod here. You have to ask Perff. I'm pretty sure he has set up back ups etc. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Quoting CreaMD
And by the way, this thread was about "released at" field and not about CMS and improvements etc, so please be so kind and stop spreading your foolish quarell with Groepaz to new threads.
Your comment is wrong and off topic. There is nothing about a quarell and your comment misrepresents the situation. The problem is Groepaz's and now your very off topic comments.
On topic, one way this thread question can be answered is by using a different CMS. The technical aspects of that are something I and others can help with. This is because some of us are programmers with relevant experience. That is why points about a CMS are on topic and relevant to this topic. |
| |
TNT
Account closed
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 189 |
Quoting Martin PiperI cannot see any harm in releasing the database for this site along with source code.
I can. Vulnerabilities are much easier to find when you have the source. You as one of us programmers should be aware of that. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Quoting TNTI can. Vulnerabilities are much easier to find when you have the source. You as one of us programmers should be aware of that.
That is a common mistake to make. Trying to any hide bad code is no way to try to be secure. With many more eyes looking problems are found quicker than having one person trying to any hide bad code.
Generally speaking in software development it pays to have more eyes looking at the code. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
Martin, did you notice, that you always know everything better than anyone else ?:) |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Not really. Programming is such a large field that it is impossible to know everything. I don't remember in depth knowledge about scan cycle timings and sprites active with VIC memory access timings. So you don't see me comment on those threads. But on topics I'm good at then I might comment. Which is why when I do comment I'm usually right. ;) |
| |
Perplex
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 255 |
Quoting TNTVulnerabilities are much easier to find when you have the source.
Yeah, much easier to find and then fix or report so that it can be fixed. That was your point, was it?
|
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Yes, that was his point. :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:And by the way, this thread was about "released at" field and not about CMS and improvements etc
back to topic, will ya? :) |
| |
Slimex
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 6 |
blablablablah... really? blablablablahblaah... are you kidding?
there must be more important stuff than this topic... |
