Author:
|
Topic: WebApp dot net vs dot org? | ||||
DanteDonatelloLast Visit: 06/17/10 Level 1 Joined: 06/01/10 Forum Posts: 19 |
Can somebody please explain to me the difference between Web-App sites and the downloads? Versions of the web-app cms (v:1. v:0.9)?
I hope I am not stepping into deep doodoo, but I am a bit confused. DD My generic signature... |
||||
| Logged |
| ||||
Ted CambronLast Visit: 09/08/10 Administrator Dev Joined: 05/26/06 Forum Posts: 2237 |
In a nut shell, the Original "WebAPP" site was .org owned by Carter Brown. The site was
shut down and he didn't give a rat's ass. The community of developers needed a place to collaborate on the project so On set-up "The WebAPP Network" (.net). A certain wannabe coder tried to recruit the WebAPP developers from this site to work on one of her own pet projects, yet another branch of WebAPP. Aaron and I launched an infamous mud slinging contest in an attempt to thwart this attempt to lure the only remaining "true" WebAPP developers into a swirling cesspool of her own steaming desires. This certain novice coder eventually left the network along with a few bleeding heart sympathizers who couldn't stomach the verbal abuse we were giving her. They didn't really contribute that much and weren't Perl savvy any-who. The certain inept coder virtually sucked Carter's cock until he gave her the .org domain. She reopened the .org site under the false pretense that Carter was still involved and it was still the true WebAPP community site. By this time the only people who believed that still think the world is flat. That's the difference between the sites. There's a wonderful article located here: The WebAPP Story As far as the versions go. The ring leader of the org domain took the work being done here and began releasing a "new" version every other week (every week?) whereas the network concentrated it's effort on implementing better coding practices and withheld releasing anything until there was enough updating and testing to justify releasing a new product. The .spin off (insecure version) has some good updates and still resembles the original script. The network version is nearly a complete overhaul almost a completely different script. Security and speed were the main driving force behind a lot of the reconstruction. There are some thing I like and dislike about both. 0 but true |
||||
| Logged |
| ||||
DanteDonatelloLast Visit: 06/17/10 Level 1 Joined: 06/01/10 Forum Posts: 19 |
I like the idea of focusing on speed and security. What I do not like about PHP based cms/blogs is the constant updating for security reasons and the fact that some of them have some s[eed issues depending on what you do with them. I guess the only question(s) that leaves me with is 'what do you not like, if anything, about the new re-built version [.net] when it comes to the issue of security and speed?
DD your story: and too funny. next time try and tell me what you really think. ;/) My generic signature... |
||||
| Logged |
| ||||
DanteDonatelloLast Visit: 06/17/10 Level 1 Joined: 06/01/10 Forum Posts: 19 |
Well (lol) I just got through reading an interesting tale of woe and behold. I'm not sure how this applies but Woe and Behold it reminds me of. At first I thought our little story was a bit immature and all, but after a thorough reading I think I understand.
Why is 'YaWPS' dead? What do you mean by a 'live' web portal? Live vs static? AnimAlf, mentioned 'the the future of YaWPS is convert-it in only an engine, and all the rest is a module interactuation.' Is he talking about a cms that resembles the .net web-app? My generic signature... |
||||
| Logged |
| ||||
Ted CambronLast Visit: 09/08/10 Administrator Dev Joined: 05/26/06 Forum Posts: 2237 |
After reading that poem and taking two aspirin I sat here wondering what I was doing in
the first place :p When I say there are things I dislike it's because I get too overly particular about certain things that really shouldn't matter. For speed and security this script is the best bet. I just disagree with some technical coding matters such as subroutines that direct you to another file that consists of only one subroutine or a subroutine that only gets used once. I would rather drop the code into where it's needed or require the file without wrapping it in a subroutine. I also think some of the filtering is overkill. I use cgi.pm for all my form and query string processing. I also use Perl modules for HTML encoding and stripping. I think trying to do it any other way is not best. I like to use dispatch tables throughout my script and I still see code that just doesn't make good sense to me and post it in the developers forums now and then. It's just details that don't amount to much but matter to my pee brain. 0 but true |
||||
| Logged |
|
| Pages: [1] | ||