On 23 Feb 00, at 16:17, Roy Tennant wrote:
> Michiel Dethmers <firstname.lastname@example.org> kindly rewrote AutoSwish, then
> we got bogged down in other responsibilities before we could test it
Yes, it's available for download at http://www.quipu.co.uk/SWISH-
E. I would certainly appreciate feedback, and I will promise to add
improvements when I get feedback. The current system doesn't
use the full capabilities of swish-e, but I will keep adding things in
the future. I am using the system on a few sites of clients, and
they seem quite content with the useability of it.
So please, use it, check it and tell me what you think.
> out and prepare it for release. If anyone wants to take on that role,
> please let me know. Although I am sure Michiel did wonderful work, I'm
> loathe to put it up for anyone to download until it has been tested.
> We get enough support questions without adding to them. Thanks, Roy
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, David Norris wrote:
> > PropheZine Owner wrote:
> > > I'm not entirely sure of the capabilities or full purpose of
> > > Autoswish. Is it possible for autoswish that is installed on
> > > server A to index server B through the net?
> > >
> > > Is this part of the purpose of Autoswish?
> > AutoSWISH was designed to allow you to edit/create SWISH indices
> > from the web. For example, you have a bunch of users and you want
> > them to be able to index their web directory without having to
> > manually edit SWISH config files. It was just a web interface to
> > the filesystem indexer. The HTTP (Spider) indexer didn't exist then.
> > AutoSWISH has not been maintained since around SWISH-E/1.1, as far
> > as I know. It was pulled because of security concerns. I've seen
> > occasional mention of people wanting to rewrite or update it. But,
> > I've not seen any mention of success.
> > --
> > ,David Norris
> > Open Server Architecture Project - http://www.opensa.org/
> > Dave's Web - http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
> > ICQ Universal Internet Number - 412039
> > E-Mail - email@example.com
To Be AND not to Be, that's the answer.
(At least, to a certain extent... )
Received on Fri Feb 25 06:58:29 2000