On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:16:27 -0500 (EST)
Christopher Hicks <chicks@chicks.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Colin Viebrock wrote:
>> > My point is that *TOO MUCH WORK* is required to
>>implement
>> > the spec as currently documented.
>>
>> I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on
>>this. I didn't
>> find it too much work, and neither have others.
>
>While the OpenSRS documentation is imperfect is has
>continually improved
>and has always been quite adequate.
>
>The fact and value that a complete implemenation is
>provided in addition
>to the spec seems to have been glossed over here. The
>availabilty of a
>complete implementation allowed me as well as many others
>to discern how
>things worked and to implement our own client. I've had
>good responses
>from this list and from OpenSRS support when problems
>have arisen despite
>using an "officially unsupported client".
Then my appologies to all as OpenSRS did not tell me
Windows was an "officially unsupported client", nor have I
read that anywhere!
My apopologies to all.
>> > http://www.netcraft.com/survey/
>> >
>> > which cleary shows Microsoft is implemented on
>> > approximantly 30% of the 35 million sites surveyed.
>> >
>> > Tucows is refusing to properly support its customer
>>base
>> > though direct support of the Windows Platform..
>>
>> Who cares what 30% of 35 million sites run? What
>>matters is what your
>> site runs.
>
>And netcraft isn't relevant to this situation since I
>seriously doubt that
>even 0.1% of the Microsoft sites are running on Windows
>98. The Windows
>web servers are running on platforms that are capable of
>running IIS!
>The above line of reasoning particularly troubles me
>considering the
>amount of mud that's been slung toward OpenSRS in this
>thing.
Double - Huh?
I'm programing in Windows at the OS level thus the exact
incarnation of Windows does not matter. When complete
users will be able to run this app on Windows 3.1 if they
have the desire ....
Go back and read my posts,
1) I've said at least twice that Tucows support is
*AWESOME*, I'm just peived at the API Docs.
2) I said I have implemented a solution via a enom
reseller account as an interim solution and I'm now trying
to impliment the OpenSRS API.
I *LOVE* Tucows and OpenSRS other wise I *WOULD NOT* be
trying so hard to implement a OpenSRS registration system
in this app -- It allready works via enom!
I think *ALL* registrars should use Tucows as their model
regarding how to treat and support customers. I also wish
there was a simple way to register domains via OpenSRS!
>Trying to
>run production work on Windows 98 places you on the
>fringe.
Nope. This is an app with a registration feature so your
comment does not apply to me as the user must be free to
run the app on any reasonable Windows edition. Even
Windows 95 if still reasonable in my book and a Windows OS
implementation of OpenSRS API will do that just fine.
>Maybe there's
>a reason Microsoft doesn't support IIS on 98!?
Yup, Billy boy gets far more in his pocket for Windows
2000 Server licenses. Why should he cut his own top line?
> If you
>insist on being on
>such a fringe, you're going to have to expect to do more
>and more work for
>yourself thorugh time. I don't whine because nobody
>writes software for
>my Vax and I have do everything for myself. Puh-leaze!
LOL! I was asking people to help me if they could. You
can't so my question(s) were obviously not directed at
you.
>And ActivePerl does work on Windows 98. We don't support
>it anymore since
>every business we consult with has moved to at least
>Windows 2000, but we
>ran some significant chunks of Perl middleware on Windows
>98 successfully
>in multi-continent deployments. Saying that activeperl
>doesn't work
>because IIS isn't available is dishonest.
Again, go back and *READ* my comments.
I installed Active PERL and could not get it working. When
I reviewed the Installation notes after I did the install
I noted that IIS was mention as a requirement which
suggested to me,
1) That a server layer of some sort was needed
2) That it would take more that 10-15 minutes to get this
working even though someone did post that this was all
that was necessary.
Furthermore someone *DID* mention I was wrong about the
Active PERL requirements and I said they were probably
right and I was wrong.
So please refresh my memory, exactly where have I behaved
irresponsibly during this rather overwhelming
experiance?????
Though the wonderful help of others I have consistantly,
and clearly, admitted to my screwups.
I'm just trying to use Windows OS to register domains via
Tucows .... *NOW* I'm whining! LOL!
>"Never offend people with style when you can offend them
>with substance."
> - Sam Brown
Exactly!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:33 EDT