Login
User Name:

Password:



Register
Forgot your password?
Vote for Us!
tintin++ ogg sound player script for linux
Author: Robert Smith
Submitted by: Vladaar
6Dragons ogg Soundpack
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
6Dragons 4.4
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
LoP 1.46
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
LOP 1.45
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
Users Online
CommonCrawl, Yandex

Members: 0
Guests: 6
Stats
Files
Topics
Posts
Members
Newest Member
481
3,733
19,362
618
Micheal64X
Today's Birthdays
There are no member birthdays today.
Related Links
» SmaugMuds.org » General » General Discussions » Recovery of old information
Forum Rules | Mark all | Recent Posts

Recovery of old information
< Newer Topic :: Older Topic >

Pages:<< prev 1 next >>
Post is unread #1 Oct 13, 2007, 4:57 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,643
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Ok. So now that things have pretty much settled out, and I've moved this site to another box as an added precaution against another disaster, the time comes to think about what needs to be recovered.

If there's any bits of information you feel are of critical importance and you have them readily available, go ahead and post them. If you've got information you dug up from Google's cache, by all means, repost that too if you can. Otherwise contact me with the information.

If there's any interest from the community in trying to fish things up from Google's cache, the advice is to act quickly and grab what you can. They've already begun expunging pages that are getting 404 errors from my own blog site and it's been less than a week. I regret that I don't have the time to invest in doing this myself for a project site this size.
       
Post is unread #2 Oct 13, 2007, 5:34 pm   Last edited Nov 25, 2007, 6:35 pm by Samson
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

If it'd help, I can provide the last 762 posts (including the one above) from my RSS reader for you, but the longer ones get cut off rather strangely.. and none of them retain formatting very nicely either. :sad:
For example, the post I'm currently responding to has this in my RSS Reader:
Subject: Recovery of old information
From: Samson <nobody@example.com>
Date: 10/14/2007 03:57 AM
Website: http://www.smaugmuds.org/index.php?a=topic&t=2476&p=9220#p9220
Ok. So now that things have pretty much settled out, and I've moved this site to another box as an added precaution against another disaster, the time comes to think about what needs to be recovered. If there's any bits of information you feel are of critical importance and you have them readily available, go ahead and post them. If you've got information you dug up from Google's cache, by all means, repost that too if you can. Otherwise contact me with the information. If there's any inte

Still, if it'd be any help, I'm happy to try to figure out how to relay them to you, Samson...

[Edit:] Hmm, after closer inspection, it seems that in my reader, those posts seem to span a period of 1/29/07-2/2/07 and then 7/1/07 through current, I'm not sure what happened to the posts between February and July though, that's not the case for the posts from the AFK forums...
       
Post is unread #3 Oct 13, 2007, 6:52 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,643
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Your RSS reader didn't cut them off. The forum doesn't deliver past the 200th character of a post. I doubt the RSS data will be of much help. However, users of Google Desktop might just have a ton of information stashed away that could prove quite valuable.
       
Post is unread #4 Oct 13, 2007, 7:08 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

I really wish there was an easy way to tell the forums not to cut them off that way. *sigh* Oh well.

Hmm, I use google desktop on my Vista machine, I wonder how much it'd actually have for me since I do almost all of my actual browsing on my linux box...
       
Post is unread #5 Oct 13, 2007, 7:20 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

It's probably just a limit hard-coded in the RSS feed generator. Should be easy to change, but if it was put there in the first place, chances are somebody thought it was important. :shrug:

I also have very long archives of truncated posts from RSS. So I could tell you how many posts were made in which threads, but not what they were really about. :smile:
       
Post is unread #6 Oct 13, 2007, 7:35 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,643
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Hindsight and all. I think the 200 char limit was imposed a long time ago because some RSS readers have difficulty with large articles beyond that range. My guess is that it was only a small minority of rss clients. I think at this point Google Desktop is going to be the best possibility for recovering anything. So if there's going to be some efforts made in that area, concentrate them on the bugfixes. And Conner, I'm not sure how thorough it is while running but here's to hoping it grabbed more than just what you surfed.
       
Post is unread #7 Oct 13, 2007, 7:42 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Re: the 200 limit.. interesting, I'll have to see how changable that is.. and what effect changing it has. :devil:

Re: google desktop.. I'll have to let you know what I find, though if someone else has it running on the same computer they're browsing with, they'd certainly have a better expectation of a valid success rate.
       
Post is unread #8 Oct 13, 2007, 7:44 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

You know, having a record of bugfixes is an argument for version control; it'd be very easy to mirror repositories across several servers. It would also decentralize the information, so that a failure of the forum database doesn't cause the bug fixes to be lost and all that. (And yes, hindsight and 20/20 and all that.)
       
Post is unread #9 Oct 14, 2007, 12:32 am
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

How would you propose version control be implimented at this point to accomidate a retro active tracking of bug fixes to date? Or could that be done? Maybe start the repository with Smaug 1.4a and then check-in each version of SmaugFUSS (1.4, 1.6, 1.7, and 1.8 to bring us up to date) as a new set of changes?
       
Post is unread #10 Oct 14, 2007, 11:51 am
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,643
JoinedJan 1, 2002

Ok, as I'm sure your scrambled RSS readers have indicated, along with the sudden jump in "new" posts, I managed to recover all of the bugfixes that had been posted since January 28, 2007. We have the MSN Search cache to thank for this one as Google has already begun systematically purging their database of all the 404 links.

So I guess that leaves us with recovering anything else that was important.
       
Post is unread #11 Oct 14, 2007, 2:11 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Actually, it wasn't that bad on the RSS reader, just a bunch of posts to mark as already read. :wink:

Amazing that we can depend on MSN further than Google.. though for most other purposes having a faster cache refresh time on search engines is probably better. *shrug* Gratz on recovering what you were able to though. :smile:

What else was important?
       
Post is unread #12 Oct 14, 2007, 2:39 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

Conner said:

How would you propose version control be implimented at this point to accomidate a retro active tracking of bug fixes to date? Or could that be done? Maybe start the repository with Smaug 1.4a and then check-in each version of SmaugFUSS (1.4, 1.6, 1.7, and 1.8 to bring us up to date) as a new set of changes?

It wouldn't really be possible to retroactively fix it without a fair bit of manual work (that is, adding each fix by hand). I was actually suggesting that from now on, we use version control and mirror the repositories to help avoid this problem in the future.
       
Post is unread #13 Oct 14, 2007, 3:09 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Samson
Black Hand
GroupAdministrators
Posts3,643
JoinedJan 1, 2002

How would that be done though? Version control for forum posts? :P

I realize you probably mean doing it with subversion or that other program you use but that doesn't really change much when it comes to posting the fixes online.
       
Post is unread #14 Oct 14, 2007, 3:14 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

I meant that the bugs would be added to a version control system, and instead of posting them in "English" to the forum, a diff of just that fix would be posted. The diffs are pretty easy to get into very readable format, which would be essentially the same as what the current system does.
       
Post is unread #15 Oct 14, 2007, 5:24 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

I think that if you were going to start a new version control repository for SmaugFUSS at this point, I would go ahead and start the repository with stock Smaug 1.4a then check-in (as updates) each of the four SmaugFUSS versions to-date just to at least reflect the differences between the existing versions, then go with the new bug fixes from here on as individual check-ins, I wouldn't redo each bug fix to-date through SmaugFUSS 1.8 manually for the sake of the repository, it'd just take too much effort at this point. But maybe that's just me.
       
Post is unread #16 Oct 14, 2007, 5:31 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

Oh, sure, that would make sense. It'd be pretty easy to do, too. I'm not sure it would make sense to version everything like that (help files, areas, etc.) but definitely the source would be quite easy to do. Sorry, I thought you were talking about each individual fix. :)
       
Post is unread #17 Oct 14, 2007, 5:40 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

No, well, each file would get checked-in, but not manually. :wink:
*shrug* Since this is SmaugFUSS and the only changes to non-source files we make around here are usually fixes to specific errors (mainly in help.are), but we did recently change the format of the area files, why not check in the whole package to reflect whatever changes have been made, including additions to the system folder and changes to other folders?
It's not like we'd be checking in files from folders other than src often, even in the old version check-ins, but it'd serve to establish the "paper trail" of all the changes since Smaug 1.4a.
       
Pages:<< prev 1 next >>