|
I glad it wasn't just me, serious bit of wtf going on!
|
|
|
|
|
All I got from that were lame justifications.
|
|
|
|
|
Really? We can easily make alternatives be blogs, but...but...they aren't blogs. They are articles.
What's your preference?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
To keep winding you up mate. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's so not fair. I'm pre-coffee. Pre coffee, for the love of God!
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Nurse! Double strength espresso! Stat.
|
|
|
|
|
Have a ![Beer | [beer]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif) 
|
|
|
|
|
Let me try again.
We have a bunch of different article "types": Article, Technical Blog, Tip and Video. We suck in the blog postings of members, create them as articles, and mark them as Technical Blogs in order to give the readers a hint that the formatting and layout may be a little odd because it was sucked in from someone's blog feed. "Like" buttons, potentially broken images, references to other blog posts, odd colours in code colourisation etc may be included and may look a little odd, so my hope is that the "Technical Blog" label will allow readers to forgive small transgressions.
But these Technical Blog articles are still articles.
If you create an alternative to a blog article then you're not creating something sucked in from an XML feed. You won't (I hope) include weirdness. Further, and most importantly, your alternative was never posted as a blog that was subsequently sucked in by our blog aggregator. When you post an alternative to a blog you are not posting a blog. You're posting an article that presents an alternative to the blog.
So we label them as Articles.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Better. (I think)
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
Made perfect sense the first time, I thought.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
What, no mention of unicorns?
I shakes my head....... 
Chris Maunder wrote: So we label them as Articles.
"Then on the seventh day, Maunder rested".
|
|
|
|
|
DaveAuld wrote: "Then on the seventh day, Maunder rested".
 
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
Now when I read my question again I think it needs clarification:
What surprised me was that the alternative was listed as a new article in the CP front page. What I was expecting was that it would have been in the Blogs queue even though it's technically stored as an article (after all it's an alternative to a blog entry).
The other thing was that I feel that the alternative is over valued. Based on on the information about the rep system, a new blog entry is worth 10 points. Now if the alternative is worth 100 points, that doesn't quite make sense.
As a personal opinion I think alternatives (article/blog/tip) are often lighter than the original posts since they can mostly refer to the original text, code etc. So I feel that an alternative should be worth less than the original one, for example 50% of points. So in the case of a blog entry (worth 10 points) the altenative should receive 5 points.
Does that make any sense
|
|
|
|
|
Sense, it makes. It does, yes.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current feature of CP allows us to download the code files one at a time.
If we can have one functionality to download all the code files added to a particular article at one go, then that would be great and it will save our time too...
|
|
|
|
|
All articles should contain a link at the beginning that allow you to download the full project source code as a zip file. It is the responsibility of the author to make this available.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
We're working on something even more broad ranging than that.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Oh really... Thanks a lot...
Let's wait and see, what Chris brings new to CP. 
|
|
|
|
|
Why does CodeProject provide insecure login at the top of the page?
If I type the wrong password in the box first time, then it will take me to a https page, which is a good thing.
But since CP already has SSL anyway, I don't see a reason to leave this vulnerability?
|
|
|
|
|
If you look at the source of the page, the login form submits to an HTTPS target
<script type="text/javascript">
function doSubmit(secure)
{
if (secure)
document.subForm.action = "https://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/LogOn.aspx?rp=%2fMessages%2f4365528%2fRe-CodeProject-insecure-login.aspx"
else
document.subForm.action = "https://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/LogOn.aspx?rp=%2fMessages%2f4365528%2fRe-CodeProject-insecure-login.aspx"
document.subForm.submit();
return true;
}
</script>
<a name="SignUp"></a>
<form name="subForm" id="subForm" action="https://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/LogOn.aspx?rp=%2fMessages%2f4365528%2fRe-CodeProject-insecure-login.aspx" method="post" class="tight">
|
|
|
|
|
I am aware of that, but it doesn't prevent an MITM attack. Whenever there are input boxes on a page which is not secured, nothing guarantees you that you are not being a victim of a MITM attack.
All form post links could be rewritten to send the data elsewhere. Even worse, page could be running a key-logging JavaScript code, and no-one would have a clue that their passwords have being stolen before they even clicked the submit button.
modified 26-Sep-12 11:43am.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Could it be possible now or in future to reply for any comment through registered email will post in particular discussion ?
Say, i got one comment in one article and when i do reply(from email) it should be post on that comment.
And do we have RSS feed for QA ? it would be nice to have email reply feature from QA. People can post solution from email.
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
|
If it needs to be in the thread, it should be replied to as a thread. If you think about it, this makes sense - what happens if you email someone and that post appears, but then they reply to you through their email client? At this point, only your post appears - there is no reply to it in the thread chain. Then you reply to that email - pretty soon you have a whole host of information that does not make it into the post.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: what happens if you email someone and that post appears,
No, Email should not be converted into the post. Only reply for the post should be submitted on that thread.
Scenario:
1) I got one Question through RSS feeds, I reply from email client and it submit it as a solution(if it enclose with <Solution> element. if it posted with <comment> tag then it should be post as comment.
2) if i got email comment on particular solution, it will definitly post as comment for the reply from email client.
Does it make scence ?
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
