 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26.07.2020 02:42, Chris Cason wrote:
> On 26/07/2020 06:24, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> because of some technical product expertise I had, and the sponsored
>> account status meant that I didn't pay the by-the-minute charges that
>> CompuServe charged.
>
> Compuserve charges were exorbitant over here in AU (about USD $35/hr). I
> didn't have an offline reader when I started hanging around GO GRAPHDEV
> reading messages and downloading images and for the first few months I
> felt like was helping fund their CEO's new Ferrari.
>
> I got OzCis which helped a bit but even then with only a 14.4k modem I
> had to be wary of what binaries I downloaded (or uploaded), which is
> likely the primary reason I don't have a full archive of all the images
> from the early Compuserve days.
You might also want to ask Chris Young, maybe he has an archive, too.
IIRC at least on GO POVRAY he would upload full source archives based on
patches we submitted.
As for myself, I do seem to have a full archive of GO POVRAY on my old
PowerMac 7200. But the Compuserve software requires Mac OS 8 or System
7, it seems :-( So I have to see if I can work around that given I had
upgraded that Mac to Mac OS 9, apparently.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/07/2020 14:43, Thorsten wrote:
> On 25.07.2020 14:57, jr wrote:
>> when the server is finally updated, maybe there will be an opportunity
>> to change
>> policy, and require a valid email address when registering to post to
>> this site.
>> not an unreasonable (or uncommon) requirement.
>
> And still zero understanding of NNTP an your behalf.
>
> *plonk*
Don't you mean?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7IuNfiph90
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 14:27:02 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/07/2020 14:43, Thorsten wrote:
>> On 25.07.2020 14:57, jr wrote:
>>> when the server is finally updated, maybe there will be an opportunity
>>> to change policy, and require a valid email address when registering
>>> to post to this site.
>>> not an unreasonable (or uncommon) requirement.
>>
>> And still zero understanding of NNTP an your behalf.
>>
>> *plonk*
>
> Don't you mean? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7IuNfiph90
LOL
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 05:24:30 -0400, jr wrote:
> yes, the site(s) will have to comply with Australian (?) data protection
> law,
> one assumes.
Given the international nature of the community, GDPR may also be a
consideration. That's one of the big challenges these days with data
protection laws.
I'm not a lawyer, but that *might* be an argument for not requiring
authentication - because then the users aren't submitting any PII unless
they choose to (it's not 'required' - nobody ever considers that the
submitted data doesn't need to be true, though, and the laws generally
don't account for that).
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Good day ! Any information can help. So:
Jr, I must start by telling you thanks again for trying to help me to get
HGpovRay to compile last time, further than what appeared on the newsgroups
since you did send me personal emails on my request to help me with files you
had provided here. Though I still haven't managed to build hgpovray under
windows is another issue. I felt mentioning this could help keeping the talk
fair and not make you appear as a pure pressurizing ranter. Before hopefully
closing your dispute and refocusing on topic.
I must express my disagreement with this point: that both Chris Cason and Jim
Henderson would owe us anything... In fact it's the opposite. The community owes
*a lot* to them.
Note that Jim has always been a particularly adorable person, but that is
besides the point. Though he is now "retired" from this task, Jim's work on
documentation has been exemplar and not only relatively to the open source
world. It's one of the reasons I felt POV had not that much to envy to some
professional software around. POV doc is better than 3D Studio max's doc and
that's not the worse commercial one available at all.
Meanwhile on developer-side, this value is certainly acknowledged. The natural
feeling of the POV syntax in general and the way it was carefully extended for
every new feature proves it constantly.
SO, I am very glad that Chris Cason does not feel discouraged and is open to
have such a debate and keep up with all this.
*About Moray:
I hope this won't sound bitter nor jealous of its achievement because it surely
was and will be a great piece of software.
But people asking for it all the time... well, kind of slightly gets on my nerve
:-) why? when I have been striving to get some feedback for ten years, and keep
adding and fixing features to the Blender-to-POV-and-back addon, which may, or
may not, be less perfect in many ways. I get none... No, almost none, thanks to
people like Jim, Stephen, and a few others of whom you may well be. but the
point is not much feedback and even less contribution.
I would also be glad to have Moray up and running, but Blender is so feature
packed that Moray will not be much more than Wings compared to it in the best
case scenario: a subset. There people generally answer "but Blender's interface
is akward". THESE DAYS ARE OVER. they did a complete rewrite for version 2.5 and
yet another complete rewrite for version 2.8
These changes did cost us time. We had to fix the exporter in so many ways. Now
it's getting back to its functional state of version 2.79 at last... And now
default selection is Left click. I know we didn't do all this for nothing, but I
wish others knew it as well! If all those who just wait for Moray or instead try
to rebuild their own modeler from scratch had contributed, be it just with
patient feedback, this community would already just be having fun with one hell
of a tool, and I speculate this would be source for some if not all of the
momentum, that seems to be desired by everyone participating in the present
discussion.
I did consider to rather invest all my time in Moray first, but it's build in
lower level language, that I know much less about. Currently very little of the
Blender addon is implemented in C++, only Syntax highlighting, the rest is all
Python awesomeness. If we did have more experienced programmers or if I became
myself as proficient with C, even then, I would wait for Moray to be as feature
packed as Blender before giving it primary focus.
Note that I would not exclude dedicating some time to it as a close second
however : that's why we named the add-on without restricting it to the Blender
field. I would rather see in the long run the "POV Converter" as a suite of
tools or a hub / pipeline glue between several 3D and 2D apps mutualising
resources for Blender(Python3), [Freestyle-->] Inkscape(Python3), Moray(if
Python 3.x support is an option, that would actually enable us to do something
more for it than just feedback or documentation).
*About POV:
Persistence of Vision became something worth defending for the common good of
all the digital world:
It can be the first language a child learns. Yet it actually is so powerful at
what it does that it's pretty close to rival what was used not so long ago to
produce the best feature length movies at Pixar.
If one knows his way around "non conservative" / "expressive NPR" options, it
can even be of some use in more precise work like scientific visualization, or
predictive rendering. Though a little below the "competition" (only where
spectral nature of light is involved) in this field (Luxrender has this at
heart) But POV-Ray remains unbeatable geometry wise.
So...
*What could be improved?
A)Get to open up more to other communities.
Something almost happened once: Campbell Barton, one of the top 3 Blender devs
reached out to offer a week end of his to set up a C-Make based cross platform
build system for POV. No-one seemed interested. (He had started and we have a
cloned archive of his files so someone with the skills could still pick it up).
What could happen then? Then the addon could be delivering a POV engine within
the Blender package. We would have the luck to benefit so much more literate
testing, debugging...
B)Modernize its image... People do not realize how lively and adapting the
software and its community are.
Here are three examples:
"Radiosity" in most software designates the technique to actually bake the
diffuse secundary bounce illumination solution to vertices (vertex color), that
is generally a very rough precision approximation of what pov does which is
elsewhere rather called Global Illumination, the kind POV does, I believe,
being more specifically called "Irradiance" based, but please someone more
versed could correct me if I'm wrong. However this reads as if POV had no GI !
"Raytracer" In the main part of a software name is no longer used because 99% of
renderers are raytracers, currently often physically based, path tracers,
whatever... But except Freestyle and the likes, there is almost no
"non-raytracers" this makes it looks as if POV had not evolved since the
nineties.
The logo used at the head of the documentation:
"Persistence of Vision" in the Maiandra GD font with bump cracks disappearing
two shiny transparent spheres was fine then... in the nineties. Even the blue
logo on the banner of the website is more modern, but the one on the POVwin
splash screen is better than both in this regard. (please if you could avoid
abbreviating, at least the logo to "povray" that would be great for french
speakers, to which it sounds something like "RETARD" or "POORTHING", so any time
we communicate people just laugh. I personally refer to it explicitly as
Persistence of Vision in interfaces and use only the very short form POV when
lacking space... Until it gets so famous for his long lasting life that I can
get away with simply calling it "Persistence" in most situations :-)
C) Get more self confident in current workflow to fidelize users, but please, do
not give up +RTR feature.
Though it's not a scientific approach, I sometimes have the curiosity to examine
some 3d rendering / POV related keywords trajectories using google Trends. And
though this easily reveals how massive the requests for Blender are over POV,
however, when you reach far enough into the past, and add a real time engine
such as Unity at the very beginning of the data, it reveals that POV was at the
time bigger than today's biggest player, and that it was the object of more
curiosity than V-Ray, Renderman or MentalRay ! I really wonder what could have
provided this bubble and start to daydream about re-taping into that growth
potential for my favorite software. The real time feature does not have to be as
good as the rest. It can just be an entry point, but if it's given up, I think
it would become a bottleneck in the attractivity of the software.
https://trends.google.fr/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0150lk,%2Fm%2F0l1qq,%2Fm%2F041kyp,%2Fm%2F06bpry,%2Fm%2F0dmyvh
Sorry for the length of this message, and eventual non native speaker mistakes.
Thanks for reading, and for all the rest !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 17:34:57 -0400, Mr wrote:
> I must express my disagreement with this point: that both Chris Cason
> and Jim Henderson would owe us anything... In fact it's the opposite.
> The community owes *a lot* to them.
>
> Note that Jim has always been a particularly adorable person, but that
> is besides the point. Though he is now "retired" from this task, Jim's
> work on documentation has been exemplar and not only relatively to the
> open source world. It's one of the reasons I felt POV had not that much
> to envy to some professional software around. POV doc is better than 3D
> Studio max's doc and that's not the worse commercial one available at
> all.
I appreciate the kind words - my involvement in the documentation was
fairly limited; I helped Chris get the wiki set up, but then life took
over my time, and Jim Holsenback stepped in and took the docs to the next
level.
Credit where it's due - Jim Holsenback deserves the credit for the work
on the documentation and getting it to where it is today. :)
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sorry for top posting. I was going to reply inline but I think it would
be messy.
I'm not going to get involved with the debate with "Adorable Jim" and
JR. Not my style.
> There people generally answer "but Blender's interface is awkward". THESE DAYS ARE
OVER. They did a complete rewrite for version 2.5 and yet another complete rewrite for
version 2.8
And they broke the OBJ file importer when they did.
I am looking into doing manual repairs to the objects in Blender. I’ve
had some success with the transparency problems. Next on the list is a
UV mapping problem with the importer. Then I can contact the OBJ
importer's developers.
Most of my time recently, has been spent testing Blender’s Stop Motion
addon. Which uses the OBJ importer to import a sequence of meshes, one
per frame. Version 2.1.0 is working as advertised.
Then I am going back to work on Poser trying to get Bullet Physics to
introduce a Breast jiggle into animated meshes. A willy wobble too. ;)
> Persistence of Vision became something worth defending for the common good of all
the digital world:
It certainly is.
On 26/07/2020 22:34, Mr wrote:
> Good day ! Any information can help. So:
>
> Jr, I must start by telling you thanks again for trying to help me to get
> HGpovRay to compile last time, further than what appeared on the newsgroups
> since you did send me personal emails on my request to help me with files you
> had provided here. Though I still haven't managed to build hgpovray under
> windows is another issue. I felt mentioning this could help keeping the talk
> fair and not make you appear as a pure pressurizing ranter. Before hopefully
> closing your dispute and refocusing on topic.
>
> I must express my disagreement with this point: that both Chris Cason and Jim
> Henderson would owe us anything... In fact it's the opposite. The community owes
> *a lot* to them.
>
> Note that Jim has always been a particularly adorable person, but that is
> besides the point. Though he is now "retired" from this task, Jim's work on
> documentation has been exemplar and not only relatively to the open source
> world. It's one of the reasons I felt POV had not that much to envy to some
> professional software around. POV doc is better than 3D Studio max's doc and
> that's not the worse commercial one available at all.
>
> Meanwhile on developer-side, this value is certainly acknowledged. The natural
> feeling of the POV syntax in general and the way it was carefully extended for
> every new feature proves it constantly.
>
> SO, I am very glad that Chris Cason does not feel discouraged and is open to
> have such a debate and keep up with all this.
>
>
> *About Moray:
>
> I hope this won't sound bitter nor jealous of its achievement because it surely
> was and will be a great piece of software.
> But people asking for it all the time... well, kind of slightly gets on my nerve
> :-) why? when I have been striving to get some feedback for ten years, and keep
> adding and fixing features to the Blender-to-POV-and-back addon, which may, or
> may not, be less perfect in many ways. I get none... No, almost none, thanks to
> people like Jim, Stephen, and a few others of whom you may well be. but the
> point is not much feedback and even less contribution.
>
> I would also be glad to have Moray up and running, but Blender is so feature
> packed that Moray will not be much more than Wings compared to it in the best
> case scenario: a subset. There people generally answer "but Blender's interface
> is akward". THESE DAYS ARE OVER. they did a complete rewrite for version 2.5 and
> yet another complete rewrite for version 2.8
>
> These changes did cost us time. We had to fix the exporter in so many ways. Now
> it's getting back to its functional state of version 2.79 at last... And now
> default selection is Left click. I know we didn't do all this for nothing, but I
> wish others knew it as well! If all those who just wait for Moray or instead try
> to rebuild their own modeler from scratch had contributed, be it just with
> patient feedback, this community would already just be having fun with one hell
> of a tool, and I speculate this would be source for some if not all of the
> momentum, that seems to be desired by everyone participating in the present
> discussion.
>
> I did consider to rather invest all my time in Moray first, but it's build in
> lower level language, that I know much less about. Currently very little of the
> Blender addon is implemented in C++, only Syntax highlighting, the rest is all
> Python awesomeness. If we did have more experienced programmers or if I became
> myself as proficient with C, even then, I would wait for Moray to be as feature
> packed as Blender before giving it primary focus.
>
> Note that I would not exclude dedicating some time to it as a close second
> however : that's why we named the add-on without restricting it to the Blender
> field. I would rather see in the long run the "POV Converter" as a suite of
> tools or a hub / pipeline glue between several 3D and 2D apps mutualising
> resources for Blender(Python3), [Freestyle-->] Inkscape(Python3), Moray(if
> Python 3.x support is an option, that would actually enable us to do something
> more for it than just feedback or documentation).
>
>
> *About POV:
>
> Persistence of Vision became something worth defending for the common good of
> all the digital world:
>
> It can be the first language a child learns. Yet it actually is so powerful at
> what it does that it's pretty close to rival what was used not so long ago to
> produce the best feature length movies at Pixar.
>
> If one knows his way around "non conservative" / "expressive NPR" options, it
> can even be of some use in more precise work like scientific visualization, or
> predictive rendering. Though a little below the "competition" (only where
> spectral nature of light is involved) in this field (Luxrender has this at
> heart) But POV-Ray remains unbeatable geometry wise.
>
>
>
> So...
>
>
> *What could be improved?
>
> A)Get to open up more to other communities.
>
> Something almost happened once: Campbell Barton, one of the top 3 Blender devs
> reached out to offer a week end of his to set up a C-Make based cross platform
> build system for POV. No-one seemed interested. (He had started and we have a
> cloned archive of his files so someone with the skills could still pick it up).
> What could happen then? Then the addon could be delivering a POV engine within
> the Blender package. We would have the luck to benefit so much more literate
> testing, debugging...
>
> B)Modernize its image... People do not realize how lively and adapting the
> software and its community are.
>
> Here are three examples:
>
> "Radiosity" in most software designates the technique to actually bake the
> diffuse secundary bounce illumination solution to vertices (vertex color), that
> is generally a very rough precision approximation of what pov does which is
> elsewhere rather called Global Illumination, the kind POV does, I believe,
> being more specifically called "Irradiance" based, but please someone more
> versed could correct me if I'm wrong. However this reads as if POV had no GI !
>
> "Raytracer" In the main part of a software name is no longer used because 99% of
> renderers are raytracers, currently often physically based, path tracers,
> whatever... But except Freestyle and the likes, there is almost no
> "non-raytracers" this makes it looks as if POV had not evolved since the
> nineties.
>
> The logo used at the head of the documentation:
> "Persistence of Vision" in the Maiandra GD font with bump cracks disappearing
> when viewed small and not that nice when big ; "of" tilted 45°; and not one but
> two shiny transparent spheres was fine then... in the nineties. Even the blue
> logo on the banner of the website is more modern, but the one on the POVwin
> splash screen is better than both in this regard. (please if you could avoid
> abbreviating, at least the logo to "povray" that would be great for french
> speakers, to which it sounds something like "RETARD" or "POORTHING", so any time
> we communicate people just laugh. I personally refer to it explicitly as
> Persistence of Vision in interfaces and use only the very short form POV when
> lacking space... Until it gets so famous for his long lasting life that I can
> get away with simply calling it "Persistence" in most situations :-)
>
> C) Get more self confident in current workflow to fidelize users, but please, do
> not give up +RTR feature.
>
> Though it's not a scientific approach, I sometimes have the curiosity to examine
> some 3d rendering / POV related keywords trajectories using google Trends. And
> though this easily reveals how massive the requests for Blender are over POV,
> however, when you reach far enough into the past, and add a real time engine
> such as Unity at the very beginning of the data, it reveals that POV was at the
> time bigger than today's biggest player, and that it was the object of more
> curiosity than V-Ray, Renderman or MentalRay ! I really wonder what could have
> provided this bubble and start to daydream about re-taping into that growth
> potential for my favorite software. The real time feature does not have to be as
> good as the rest. It can just be an entry point, but if it's given up, I think
> it would become a bottleneck in the attractivity of the software.
>
>
https://trends.google.fr/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0150lk,%2Fm%2F0l1qq,%2Fm%2F041kyp,%2Fm%2F06bpry,%2Fm%2F0dmyvh
>
>
> Sorry for the length of this message, and eventual non native speaker mistakes.
> Thanks for reading, and for all the rest !
>
>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mr" <mauriceraybaud [at] hotmail dot fr>> wrote:
> I have been striving to get some feedback for ten years, and keep
> adding and fixing features to the Blender-to-POV-and-back addon, which may, or
> may not, be less perfect in many ways. I get none... No, almost none, thanks to
> people like Jim, Stephen, and a few others of whom you may well be. but the
> point is not much feedback and even less contribution.
Time, effort, lack-of-familiarity and the prospect of ascending a new learning
curve...
If it's easy to install and begin using, then it certainly might get some use
from the folks who really must use modelers for most of their work.
But there have been thousands of GREAT ideas and products out there that have
died an "unfair" death just because of certain facts of life and human nature.
And one always ignores those things at their peril. (The VHS / Beta phenomenon
amply illustrates this type of thing, as does political pandering to the morons
who understand nothing and never will)
Anyone who runs a business knows that nearly _50%_ of the budget may go straight
into advertising. And so I'd say that updating something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD4PmGLMyys
[this is the kind of screen-casting software I was referring to in a post I
can't find]
(and look at the comments - jeez :O )
would be time well spent, if it covers the major points to get someone started
and using the product FAST.
1. Here's where you download it
2. Here's how you easily install it
3. Here's how you model a simple shape with enough complexity to not just be a
scam demonstration
4. Here's how you go back and forth between POV-Ray and Blender.
It's less documentation, more tutorial, and mostly promotion.
And then the other thing that the advertisers know, is that you have to use
REPETITION.
The other thing that the advertisers know, is that you have to use REPETITION.
Because you have to keep it in the forefront of the customer's consciousness.
Because you have to use REPETITION.
So - you're likely doing all the right things in product development, but you're
not doing the things that you need to do in order to get people to use it.
Once they use it, they'll give you feedback.
> I did consider to rather invest all my time in Moray first, but it's build in
> lower level language, that I know much less about. Currently very little of the
> Blender addon is implemented in C++, only Syntax highlighting, the rest is all
> Python awesomeness.
I trust you, Maurice - I truly do. I just had a bad Python experience once.
> The logo used at the head of the documentation:
> "Persistence of Vision" in the Maiandra GD font with bump cracks disappearing
> two shiny transparent spheres was fine then... in the nineties. Even the blue
> logo on the banner of the website is more modern, but the one on the POVwin
> splash screen is better than both in this regard.
Yeah - I don't mind the current logo / icon, but for outside advertising, we
could use something a bit - flashier.
> (please if you could avoid
> abbreviating, at least the logo to "povray" that would be great for french
> speakers, to which it sounds something like "RETARD" or "POORTHING", so any
> time we communicate people just laugh.
And now so am I. :D
French translation of 'you poor thing!'
mon (ma) pauvre !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscape net> wrote:
> "Mr" <mauriceraybaud [at] hotmail dot fr>> wrote:
> But there have been thousands of GREAT ideas and products out there that have
> died an "unfair" death just because of certain facts of life and human nature.
> And one always ignores those things at their peril. (The VHS / Beta phenomenon
> amply illustrates this type of thing, as does political pandering to the morons
> who understand nothing and never will)
>
> Anyone who runs a business knows that nearly _50%_ of the budget may go straight
> into advertising. And so I'd say that updating something like this:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD4PmGLMyys
> [this is the kind of screen-casting software I was referring to in a post I
> can't find]
> (and look at the comments - jeez :O )
> would be time well spent, if it covers the major points to get someone started
> and using the product FAST.
> 1. Here's where you download it
> 2. Here's how you easily install it
> 3. Here's how you model a simple shape with enough complexity to not just be a
> scam demonstration
> 4. Here's how you go back and forth between POV-Ray and Blender.
>
> It's less documentation, more tutorial, and mostly promotion.
>
> And then the other thing that the advertisers know, is that you have to use
> REPETITION.
> The other thing that the advertisers know, is that you have to use REPETITION.
>
> Because you have to keep it in the forefront of the customer's consciousness.
>
> Because you have to use REPETITION.
>
>
> So - you're likely doing all the right things in product development, but you're
> not doing the things that you need to do in order to get people to use it.
> Once they use it, they'll give you feedback.
>
>
> > I did consider to rather invest all my time in Moray first, but it's build in
> > lower level language, that I know much less about. Currently very little of the
> > Blender addon is implemented in C++, only Syntax highlighting, the rest is all
> > Python awesomeness.
>
> I trust you, Maurice - I truly do. I just had a bad Python experience once.
>
>
>
>
> > The logo used at the head of the documentation:
> > "Persistence of Vision" in the Maiandra GD font with bump cracks disappearing
> > two shiny transparent spheres was fine then... in the nineties. Even the blue
> > logo on the banner of the website is more modern, but the one on the POVwin
> > splash screen is better than both in this regard.
>
> Yeah - I don't mind the current logo / icon, but for outside advertising, we
> could use something a bit - flashier.
>
> > (please if you could avoid
> > abbreviating, at least the logo to "povray" that would be great for french
> > speakers, to which it sounds something like "RETARD" or "POORTHING", so any
> > time we communicate people just laugh.
>
> And now so am I. :D
>
> French translation of 'you poor thing!'
> mon (ma) pauvre !
And POV did not go the VHS way because the tenacity of Chris Cason allowed for
someone like Clipka to join, and all the others to go on. I hope I will be able
to be also improving POV Converter for a long time, that's why I'll celebrate
the 10th anniversary in a few days with a bigger release and a doc sprint >
hereby incremented to also be a tutorial sprint, thanks !!!
Indeed that's already good feedback as it does give me something to do ! It DOES
give me something to do, it does ! :-D
About adorable Jim(s), now I feel really sorry and do apologize to Jim Henderson
that I do not have the luck to know as well, and was in fact *thinking* about
Jim Holsenback everytime I wrote Jim Henderson ! :-/ I am so sorry because he
cannot be as adorable as Jim Holsenback... To me... Yet anyway ... :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26.07.2020 22:30, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Given the international nature of the community, GDPR may also be a
> consideration. That's one of the big challenges these days with data
> protection laws.
Ah, I have to deal with this every day in my day job. It isn't all that
bad unless you want to milk the users for their data. There is exactly
one thing missing for the user registration on povray.org and that is a
way for the user to delete the account created. The reason is that the
personal email address is considered private data and it is required to
register because an email gets sent to it.
The other bigger issue of the website is, and I am sure Chris will
address it once time allows, that it doesn't use HTTPS for the user data
changes. Of course, nothing is gained by encryption given emails are
public anyway, but still these days with browser vendors aggressively
pushing encryption for marketing reasons, povray.org has little chance
to escape this trend on the www site.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
