|
Just tried. Got blocked:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
sean@codeproject.com
host aspmx.l.google.com [108.177.120.27]
SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data:
552-5.7.0 This message was blocked because its content presents a potential
552-5.7.0 security issue. Please visit
552-5.7.0 https://support.google.com/mail/?p=BlockedMessage to review our
552 5.7.0 message content and attachment content guidelines. m9si5385333jas.48 - gsmtp
No problem. You can get the file here:
Here
Thank you.
—SA
Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I also just encountered this error when editing an existing article and trying to replace its .zip download. This[^] is the article in question. Not only did the download fail to upload, it destroyed the download in the published version! This is a serious bug.
modified 29-Jan-21 13:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that our bug creation process has affected your ability to upload zips.
I'm attacking it now.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much, Matthew.
Could you notify me when I'm able to upload again?
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
You should be able to upload files now.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
That's right, all set now.
Thank you, Matthew!
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I think messages deleted for spam should be deleted, unless they have answers.
This is not at all different from having the same number of gibberish posts, it's still a denial of service.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
would it be possible to allow "multiple selection" for Protectors?
That way we could delete all at once (at least in the visible page), instead of needing to move mouse to each of them, click, move to "delete" in the confirmation, move to the next message and so on...
I can understand "security first" but in such cases it is really tedious to clean up a forum.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't quite understand why this article show as approved (by Editor or trusted author ). All it has is three spam reports...
- CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Left side below the tags and the stats is still "pending"
I think it is part of the same bug as here[^]
If you look at the images I posted later in the thread all the Vx are "approved by editor or trusted user" label
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified 27-Jan-21 16:03pm.
|
|
|
|
|
All gone
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: All gone gone, but not fixed I guess?
(no complain, just curiosity)
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I can still see it, and it is marked as closed. I would have expected it to be deleted as are most articles that get flagged as spam.
|
|
|
|
|
... without confirming my mail I can report members and earn points....
see here: SAOTD[^]
And it makes it possible this way, that my messages are not longer need to await moderation
modified 26-Jan-21 15:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Even more strange... your messages are chronologically inverted in this forum
Message below:
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 9:37pm
This Message I am answering:
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 9:30pm
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please send me an email (sean@codeproject.com) and I'll get this sorted for you.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
|
And now account closed?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Using Firefox 84.0.2, the "reactions" panel often disappears whilst I'm moving my mouse from the trigger to the panel. It's as if there's a path a couple of pixels wide connecting them, and if I deviate by a micron either way, the panel hides itself again.
It would be nice if you could keep the panel visible for longer - maybe using something like the jQuery hoverIntent plugin[^].
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
How is it now?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Initial impression is it seems better.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I've improved an abandoned codebase, licensed with the CPOL, creating a "derivative work". May I distribute my modifications under a different license (the MIT license)?
|
|
|
|
|
Not without permission from the original licence holder: you would be changing the terms of the licence:
Quote: BY EXERCISING ANY RIGHTS TO THE WORK PROVIDED HEREIN, YOU ACCEPT AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. THE AUTHOR GRANTS YOU THE RIGHTS CONTAINED HEREIN IN CONSIDERATION OF YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO ACCEPT AND BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, YOU CANNOT MAKE ANY USE OF THE WORK.
And
Quote: Subject to the above terms and conditions, this License is perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright in the Work). Notwithstanding the above, the Author reserves the right to release the Work under different license terms or to stop distributing the Work at any time; provided, however that any such election will not serve to withdraw this License (or any other license that has been, or is required to be, granted under the terms of this License), and this License will continue in full force and effect unless terminated as stated above.
You need the original author's permission.
CPOL: Code Project Open License[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
So it works like the Ms-PL? I mean that it infects all derivative works distributed in source?
According to the license:
d) "Executable Files" refer to the executables, binary files, configuration and any required data files included in the Work.
e) "Publisher" means the provider of the website, magazine, CD-ROM, DVD or other medium from or by which the Work is obtained by You.
f) "Source Code" refers to the collection of source code and configuration files used to create the Executable Files.
h) "Work" refers to the collection of files distributed by the Publisher, including the Source Code, Executable Files, binaries, data files, documentation, whitepapers and the Articles.
(Emphasis mine)
And in section 5:
You may distribute the Executable Files and Source Code only under the terms of this License, and You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier for, this License with every copy of the Executable Files or Source Code You distribute and ensure that anyone receiving such Executable Files and Source Code agrees that the terms of this License apply to such Executable Files and/or Source Code. You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that alter or restrict the terms of this License or the recipients' exercise of the rights granted hereunder. You may not sublicense the Work. You must keep intact all notices that refer to this License and to the disclaimer of warranties. You may not distribute the Executable Files or Source Code with any technological measures that control access or use of the Work in a manner inconsistent with the terms of this License.
My modified source files CANNOT be used to create the same "Executable Files", therefore it should NOT be treated as "Source Code" in the license, am I right?
To make it clear: I am distributing a Derivative Work. It's like getting some Apache licensed code written in Java, translating it into C#, then releasing the translated version under the MIT license. I am NOT trying to steal from the original author because the project is abandoned.
modified 24-Jan-21 11:47am.
|
|
|
|