codepad code longevity ?
Hi, We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220 I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference. Thoughts? Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote: [snip]
the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
On github there are things called 'gists' which live as long as the gist is not deleted by the account owner. Gists are full-on git repositories that can be forked by others and can be made publicly available. I hope this helps! http://gist.github.com/ -- will require that you have a Github account. -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote: [snip]
the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
On github there are things called 'gists' which live as long as the gist is not deleted by the account owner. Gists are full-on git repositories that can be forked by others and can be made publicly available.
I hope this helps!
http://gist.github.com/ -- will require that you have a Github account.
That has nothing to do with this (and please, people, quit pushing git, if we wanted to use it then we would). The issue is that instead of people posting short code snippets in-email or as an attachment, they are posting it to something like codepad or one of its clones, thus when someone looks in the boost archive however many years from now, the link is invalid or points to the wrong code if it has been reassigned. People can make codepad last indefinitely as well, but it does not do that by default, and most people do not bother to change the options. It is *always* better just in inline it or attach it, depending on length. Always more easily acceptable and indexable by google then as code that is with the archive will be linked to it, where as it is not if on codepad or anywhere else, it has no reference there.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:05 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote: [snip]
the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
On github there are things called 'gists' which live as long as the gist is not deleted by the account owner. Gists are full-on git repositories that can be forked by others and can be made publicly available.
I hope this helps!
http://gist.github.com/ -- will require that you have a Github account.
That has nothing to do with this (and please, people, quit pushing git, if we wanted to use it then we would).
You can use Github without using git. You can use it purely for the gist functionality which is equivalent (or even better) than codepad, pastebin, or others like it.
The issue is that instead of people posting short code snippets in-email or as an attachment, they are posting it to something like codepad or one of its clones, thus when someone looks in the boost archive however many years from now, the link is invalid or points to the wrong code if it has been reassigned. People can make codepad last indefinitely as well, but it does not do that by default, and most people do not bother to change the options. It is *always* better just in inline it or attach it, depending on length. Always more easily acceptable and indexable by google then as code that is with the archive will be linked to it, where as it is not if on codepad or anywhere else, it has no reference there.
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality. You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time. HTH -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:05 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote: [snip]
the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
On github there are things called 'gists' which live as long as the gist is not deleted by the account owner. Gists are full-on git repositories that can be forked by others and can be made publicly available.
I hope this helps!
http://gist.github.com/ -- will require that you have a Github account.
That has nothing to do with this (and please, people, quit pushing git, if we wanted to use it then we would).
You can use Github without using git. You can use it purely for the gist functionality which is equivalent (or even better) than codepad, pastebin, or others like it.
The issue is that instead of people posting short code snippets in-email or as an attachment, they are posting it to something like codepad or one of its clones, thus when someone looks in the boost archive however many years from now, the link is invalid or points to the wrong code if it has been reassigned. People can make codepad last indefinitely as well, but it does not do that by default, and most people do not bother to change the options. It is *always* better just in inline it or attach it, depending on length. Always more easily acceptable and indexable by google then as code that is with the archive will be linked to it, where as it is not if on codepad or anywhere else, it has no reference there.
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Dean Michael Berris
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
Of course, but what if you wanted to post something like a 200+ line sample without breaking indentation and without syntax highlighting? Then email breaks down. That is, one alternative to codepad is Github gists. I'm sure there are others out there but I was giving an alternative. HTH -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On 1/30/2010 9:27 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM, OvermindDL1<overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Dean Michael Berris
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
Of course, but what if you wanted to post something like a 200+ line sample without breaking indentation and without syntax highlighting? Then email breaks down.
A 200+ line is not the norm. In such a case, I don't like seeing it in codepad anyway. I'd prefer real cpp/hpp files as attachments or better yet, SVN. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
Of course, but what if you wanted to post something like a 200+ line sample without breaking indentation and without syntax highlighting? Then email breaks down.
A 200+ line is not the norm. In such a case, I don't like seeing it in codepad anyway. I'd prefer real cpp/hpp files as attachments or better yet, SVN.
Especially in my case since I have MSVC+VA so when I open a cpp/hpp file everything is color coded properly, so if I see anything, *anything* at all in plain black unformatted text, then I know instantly something is wrong and where it is.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:50 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
Of course, but what if you wanted to post something like a 200+ line sample without breaking indentation and without syntax highlighting? Then email breaks down.
A 200+ line is not the norm. In such a case, I don't like seeing it in codepad anyway. I'd prefer real cpp/hpp files as attachments or better yet, SVN.
Especially in my case since I have MSVC+VA so when I open a cpp/hpp file everything is color coded properly, so if I see anything, *anything* at all in plain black unformatted text, then I know instantly something is wrong and where it is.
Good for you that you have MSVC+VA. :) Anyway, I'm convinced email attachments would be good if the archives kept the attachments too for future reference. :D -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
Anyway, I'm convinced email attachments would be good if the archives kept the attachments too for future reference. :D
Which they do (or at least nabble and the others do, meaning they exist). :)
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
On 1/30/2010 9:27 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM, OvermindDL1<overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Dean Michael Berris
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
Of course, but what if you wanted to post something like a 200+ line sample without breaking indentation and without syntax highlighting? Then email breaks down.
A 200+ line is not the norm. In such a case, I don't like seeing it in codepad anyway. I'd prefer real cpp/hpp files as attachments or better yet, SVN.
I agree. Not so much as banning it though, I think saying it's "discouraged" would be alright. One reason people use codepad or pastebin or something similar is for the collaborative features -- allowing others to edit the same piece of code or at least making a new version of it for illustration. I don't think it's meant to be just for sharing static content. That assumes though that the code is meant for collaborative editing instead of just for exhibition. SVN works well for that although the infrastructure required to get involved in an SVN project is arguably too much. There's credentials, then synchronization, etc. -- whereas pastebin et al allow you to edit collaboratively on the browser. It's a convenience trade-off which for some people seem acceptable. I always saw Gists as convenient illustration "throw-away" snippets that happen to be public (or private too). Works well for IRC conversations and IM conversations. Maybe it's pushing it for email, although email could very well be the collaboration starter for most people. I'm veering off a little now so I'll stop before it gets OT. :) -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On 1/30/2010 9:17 AM, OvermindDL1 wrote:
You can use Github without using git. You can use it purely for the gist functionality which is equivalent (or even better) than codepad, pastebin, or others like it.
The issue is that instead of people posting short code snippets in-email or as an attachment, they are posting it to something like codepad or one of its clones, thus when someone looks in the boost archive however many years from now, the link is invalid or points to the wrong code if it has been reassigned. People can make codepad last indefinitely as well, but it does not do that by default, and most people do not bother to change the options. It is *always* better just in inline it or attach it, depending on length. Always more easily acceptable and indexable by google then as code that is with the archive will be linked to it, where as it is not if on codepad or anywhere else, it has no reference there.
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
And that is very important! I can't speak for Boost, but we're banning such practices in the Spirit lists. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
On 30 January 2010 01:17, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
Where-as if you post it with the email directly, you get the advantages of both lifetime and searchability. Searchability is a *HUGE* thing with archives, putting code through links kills that.
You also get offline access. Daniel
On 1/30/2010 9:09 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
The issue is that instead of people posting short code snippets in-email or as an attachment, they are posting it to something like codepad or one of its clones, thus when someone looks in the boost archive however many years from now, the link is invalid or points to the wrong code if it has been reassigned. People can make codepad last indefinitely as well, but it does not do that by default, and most people do not bother to change the options. It is *always* better just in inline it or attach it, depending on length. Always more easily acceptable and indexable by google then as code that is with the archive will be linked to it, where as it is not if on codepad or anywhere else, it has no reference there.
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Doesn't seem like an advantage to me over simple inline code in posts. If you want to post to many NGs, you can always cross post. If you want your post accessible somewhere else (e.g. blog), you can always give a link to your post, just like I've done a while ago with the links to the Spirit discussions. It doesn't make sense to link to the code anyway without the context surrounding it. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
On 1/30/2010 9:09 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Sure, but if you really wanted to use something like codepad so that the code is accessible from elsewhere, Github gists are one way of doing it. And again, you don't have to know or use git to use the gist functionality.
You also get versions for free when using gists so that you can look at the evolution of the code snippet over time.
Doesn't seem like an advantage to me over simple inline code in posts.
That's true.
If you want to post to many NGs, you can always cross post. If you want your post accessible somewhere else (e.g. blog), you can always give a link to your post, just like I've done a while ago with the links to the Spirit discussions. It doesn't make sense to link to the code anyway without the context surrounding it.
Well, now that you mention it you can embed the gist snippet using HTML+JavaScript. :D The only point I was making is that Github gists is an alternative means of doing it. Of course if the code fits in an email and is worth inlining, then that's alright I guess. It only breaks down if you have more than a manageable number of lines of code to be considered "email friendly". If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :) HTH -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
If you want to post to many NGs, you can always cross post. If you want your post accessible somewhere else (e.g. blog), you can always give a link to your post, just like I've done a while ago with the links to the Spirit discussions. It doesn't make sense to link to the code anyway without the context surrounding it.
Well, now that you mention it you can embed the gist snippet using HTML+JavaScript. :D
You can embed gist snippets in an email text post? That would be a new one on me. ;-) On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
The only point I was making is that Github gists is an alternative means of doing it. Of course if the code fits in an email and is worth inlining, then that's alright I guess.
Not asking about alternates, rather asking *NOT* to do it at all actually. Inline if short enough, or attach it as a full compilable example. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
It only breaks down if you have more than a manageable number of lines of code to be considered "email friendly".
Hence the "or attach it" bit. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Not just longevity, but also searchability, remember, everything here is archived, it needs to all be searchable *in-context*. Links elsewhere, whether codepad or anything else awful like that, like gist, harm that in a number of ways.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:36 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
If you want to post to many NGs, you can always cross post. If you want your post accessible somewhere else (e.g. blog), you can always give a link to your post, just like I've done a while ago with the links to the Spirit discussions. It doesn't make sense to link to the code anyway without the context surrounding it.
Well, now that you mention it you can embed the gist snippet using HTML+JavaScript. :D
You can embed gist snippets in an email text post? That would be a new one on me. ;-)
LOL. :D I meant if you were putting it in a blog post or something like that. ;)
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
The only point I was making is that Github gists is an alternative means of doing it. Of course if the code fits in an email and is worth inlining, then that's alright I guess.
Not asking about alternates, rather asking *NOT* to do it at all actually. Inline if short enough, or attach it as a full compilable example.
So what would the consequence be for people who do post links to gists or codepad-like services? :D Anyway, I think if it's longevity of stuff on codepad is the problem, then not using codepad is one solution. Inlining and attachments are fine until you run into the attachment limit problem. I guess what I'm saying is "discouraging" someone from doing it is different from "banning" it. Unless there's a way for automatic transparent enforcement of that, I'm not really seeing the benefit.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
It only breaks down if you have more than a manageable number of lines of code to be considered "email friendly".
Hence the "or attach it" bit.
Yup.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Not just longevity, but also searchability, remember, everything here is archived, it needs to all be searchable *in-context*. Links elsewhere, whether codepad or anything else awful like that, like gist, harm that in a number of ways.
Alright, I get the point. However I don't agree that it's as evil as it's being called out to be. It's the same problem when using tinyurl or bit.ly or even just "natural" link rot -- I don't see how it's a huge downside. If there's a downside like SEO friendliness, I think it's marginal enough to be acceptable. Just my thoughts though, not intending to represent others' ideas or positions. :) -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
The only point I was making is that Github gists is an alternative means of doing it. Of course if the code fits in an email and is worth inlining, then that's alright I guess.
Not asking about alternates, rather asking *NOT* to do it at all actually. Inline if short enough, or attach it as a full compilable example.
So what would the consequence be for people who do post links to gists or codepad-like services? :D
Asking them to follow the rules. If they break too many rules, probably banned. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
Anyway, I think if it's longevity of stuff on codepad is the problem, then not using codepad is one solution. Inlining and attachments are fine until you run into the attachment limit problem.
I have yet to run into that though, and I have posted some pretty massive post-processed code files. :) On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess what I'm saying is "discouraging" someone from doing it is different from "banning" it. Unless there's a way for automatic transparent enforcement of that, I'm not really seeing the benefit.
Same as following any other rule, like no top-posting. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Not just longevity, but also searchability, remember, everything here is archived, it needs to all be searchable *in-context*. Links elsewhere, whether codepad or anything else awful like that, like gist, harm that in a number of ways.
Alright, I get the point.
However I don't agree that it's as evil as it's being called out to be. It's the same problem when using tinyurl or bit.ly or even just "natural" link rot -- I don't see how it's a huge downside. If there's a downside like SEO friendliness, I think it's marginal enough to be acceptable.
But it really is as evil. The whole reason this came up at all is due to complaints about some old links to code in old posts were no longer working, thus the person had to post to ask how to fix it since the old fix disappeared into the aether.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:54 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris
So what would the consequence be for people who do post links to gists or codepad-like services? :D
Asking them to follow the rules. If they break too many rules, probably banned.
Sounds fair enough to me. :)
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
Anyway, I think if it's longevity of stuff on codepad is the problem, then not using codepad is one solution. Inlining and attachments are fine until you run into the attachment limit problem.
I have yet to run into that though, and I have posted some pretty massive post-processed code files. :)
I think here there's a limit to a few hundred (or one hundred?) KB per attachment. YMMV on other lists though.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess what I'm saying is "discouraging" someone from doing it is different from "banning" it. Unless there's a way for automatic transparent enforcement of that, I'm not really seeing the benefit.
Same as following any other rule, like no top-posting.
Sure, but you get warned and maybe reprimanded and people stop replying to your messages or reading them, but unless you can make sure that the email system will enforce that then it'd be a little hard to enforce. Those are "implementation details" though. :D
However I don't agree that it's as evil as it's being called out to be. It's the same problem when using tinyurl or bit.ly or even just "natural" link rot -- I don't see how it's a huge downside. If there's a downside like SEO friendliness, I think it's marginal enough to be acceptable.
But it really is as evil. The whole reason this came up at all is due to complaints about some old links to code in old posts were no longer working, thus the person had to post to ask how to fix it since the old fix disappeared into the aether.
Ah, well cases like these it makes sense. :) Now I get the rationale -- again maybe for some throw-away collaborative code editing for illustration purposes things like gists and pastebin make sense. But if it's something more "important" like examples or whatnot, a little more resilient system like inlined code and attachments would work better. -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On 1/30/2010 9:32 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Ohhh, "as long as the user's github"... That's bad. We often refer to code sometimes after a particular person becomes inaccessible (hides under a rock or inside a cave or something :-). Posts should be permanent! Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
On 1/30/2010 9:32 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Ohhh, "as long as the user's github"... That's bad. We often refer to code sometimes after a particular person becomes inaccessible (hides under a rock or inside a cave or something :-).
Posts should be permanent!
Right. I guess it has its uses (codepad, pastebin, gists) but for stuff that's meant to be "permanent" copy distribution would be the best bet. Collaboration friendliness may suffer, which I think is not the main concern here in the first place. :) -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
On 1/30/2010 9:32 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
Ohhh, "as long as the user's github"... That's bad. We often refer to code sometimes after a particular person becomes inaccessible (hides under a rock or inside a cave or something :-).
Posts should be permanent!
Right. I guess it has its uses (codepad, pastebin, gists) but for stuff that's meant to be "permanent" copy distribution would be the best bet. Collaboration friendliness may suffer, which I think is not the main concern here in the first place. :)
Yep, do remember, these are mailing lists for people asking for "help" first and foremost, and we hate answering the same question multiple times. :) For collaboration people can set up their own projects. For our *own* collaboration, we already have Boost's SVN.
Joel de Guzman wrote:
We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220
I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
If one creates and uses account, it's possible to save code in codepad permanently. For as long as codepad service stays alive, of course. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
On 1/30/2010 12:00 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220
I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
If one creates and uses account, it's possible to save code in codepad permanently. For as long as codepad service stays alive, of course.
And for as long as you have an account, which is not good enough. Posts should be permanent. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 1/30/2010 12:00 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220
I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
If one creates and uses account, it's possible to save code in codepad permanently. For as long as codepad service stays alive, of course.
And for as long as you have an account, which is not good enough. Posts should be permanent.
Yes, I personally agree and I'm not convinced to use of any kind of pastebin service for linking extra content from posts archived in the mailing list. Best regards -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Quoting Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com>:
Hi,
We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220
I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
I talked to the guy building codepad, this is what he said: "That "24 hours" policy was a cop out, in case storing pastes for longer turned out to be poblematic. It isn't, and I've never deleted old pastes. I'll remove that warning. I've also been happy to see the boost folks using codepad, and plan to do some upgrades for their benefit as soon as I can find time. I'd love to hear what they need codepad to do." If anybody has ideas for improving it, you can reach him at sah@codepad.org -- Arvid Norberg
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:56 PM, <arvid@cs.umu.se> wrote:
Quoting Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com>:
Hi,
We see more and more people post code using Codepad. Is that good? In the Spirit list, we've had this discussion about longevity of code posted to Codepad:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general/18220
I can't see any information regarding policy on how code is retained. Is there? I've heard they say the post is valid for 24 hours. If that's the case, then we should ban the use of codepad. People here, myself included, need pasted code to be permanent for future reference.
Thoughts?
I talked to the guy building codepad, this is what he said:
"That "24 hours" policy was a cop out, in case storing pastes for longer turned out to be poblematic. It isn't, and I've never deleted old pastes. I'll remove that warning.
I've also been happy to see the boost folks using codepad, and plan to do some upgrades for their benefit as soon as I can find time. I'd love to hear what they need codepad to do."
If anybody has ideas for improving it, you can reach him at sah@codepad.org
The main issue is that the code is not included with the email in the first place, hence they are not indexed together by Google and others with their mailing list post. I do not see how he can 'fix' that...
participants (6)
-
arvid＠cs.umu.se -
Daniel James -
Dean Michael Berris -
Joel de Guzman -
Mateusz Loskot -
OvermindDL1