The problem is, I have no idea about CVS at all, nor I have a machine where I could host a server (access to lots of them at work, but would rather not use them for personal stuff).

Okay, I can give you a place to host stuff if you need it. How much space are we talking?

Also, I downloaded the CVS manual. Let me see if I can get a handle on how this thing works.

Actually that's just gravy, isn't it?

Gravy??!? Gravy???? It's semantics! The stuff of which the universe is composed!!

Completely vital. Also completely liable to slip through the cracks or changed covertly by secret tech cabal fiat.

Would there be a problem with cooperating in this way just for this particular case, since there's apparently a strong need for this feature?

I think the person it would drive craziest is you, so if you're up for it ... the other potential issue is time. Like you having any to yourself.

bitterchick, the code itself takes up 761K. I'm not sure what CVS overhead is.

I think the person it would drive craziest is you, so if you're up for it ...

Bring it on, baby. I enjoy the pain.

My free days will be next Thursday and Friday (yes, I'm going to be writing PHP code during the day of the Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus!!!), but I hope I can have a glance at the code even this weekend. (Tomorrow I'll be offline most of the day; I'll be back at night). After that, though, I envision being quite busy.

bitterchick: you'll need to have permissions to install programs in your (Unix, I suppose) server, which would mean shell access (and perhaps even root). Do you have it?

Okay, I'm going to bed now. If there's more discussion about the subject, I'll read it tomorrow (but won't probably be able to reply until the night).

No, we don't have shell or root access. But my understanding, and maybe I'm completely wrong here and talking outta my ass, is that if CVS is already on the server, all we would need to do is set up CVS repositories in whatever space we allocate for you to use. I've asked my dude if we have it and, if not, can we add it.

I've asked my dude if we have it and, if not, can we add it.

That would be seven kinds of wonderful.

He's pretty sure we have it on our server. He's double-checking with the server admin to verify but it looks like we're good.

"Block" is good. More precise than "hide."

You know, I'm thinking if you've blocked a poster, you already know what it is. We probably don't need the link there. And as mentioned upthread, it's eyecatching.

Let's just make totally sure you know what you've done when you block someone. When you click "Block" and it reloads the page, first you put a big notice: "All posts by t username will be hidden by MARCIE until you unblock them. See FAQ for details." Then the blocked post for an example and the rest of the page. They'll know what they did and it'll be easy to figure out how to undo it later.

it would have to be in the old-fashioned way: developers send me the code, I send back diffs (or modified files),

How 'bout we say if we can't get CVS running by PaulJ's vacation, we just do it his way? Better than not at all. ita posted in Bureaucracy:

We can't responsibly go forward without controls -- having MARCIE be in the works would otherwise forestall or complicate other development or fixes.

But except for the HostRocket crisis, I would forestall, complicate, or outright give up every other feature on Am-Chau's list to get Marcie. CVS itself has acted as a block to development, even though it's the best practice and my impatience with it is clearly a fool's rush in where angels fear to tread.

I have plenty of time and am more than willing to help out Nora and people with any repetitive or time consuming stuff needing done (if ever) should you need an extra set of fingers at the keyboard.

Although I know I could be doing this:

fool's rush in where angels fear to tread.

anyways IJS.

I'm glad the board is up again and running so smoothly.