No, it rather means Antville gets new co-developers and contributors. Nobody of the "original" Antville team (Robert, Tobi, me) is involved with twoday.net. But it's also true that nobody will get rich from 5 € per month.

... and could you explain what 5 does exactly resp. post the code?

this just made me ask myself why the antville licence isn't copyleft-ish? then i thought, it would be smarter to ask you (robert), so there :-)

and i'm afraid i can't go on without pointing out that webster says that 'respectively' means either 'in particular', or 'in the order given'. oxford gives a subset of this, in spite of being more verbose: 'in the same order as the people or things already mentioned.' whew, i'm feeling better now.

and for michi i've got a suggestion for improvement. compare that to this. by the way, i'm for hire at the moment, do you need some help at knallgrau? :-)

ad nex: i'm afraid we do not offer a job for nitpickers (yet). any other skills you can offer besides that :-)

to robert ad 7: if this is updated to antville.org, most of the customized skins would be broken; "0 Kommentare" becomes " Kommentare". just wanted to let you know. ad 5: if you upload for example an image named 'icon' it will be automatically resized/cropped to 48x48. just resizing it, would produce ugly deformations as can be seen on most of the personal images at uboot.com for example. so, the image is first resized and then cropped. the code is pretty straight forward, and i'll send it to you via eMail.

ooooh, pity, i'd like soooo much to be a professional part-time nitpicker. besides that, i just do the usual stuff, Java (/2EE) C C++ Perl JSP (PL/)SQL etc. and i guess i'd pretty much refuse to expand past experiences with C#, ASP(.NET), VBA, COM and CORBA yuck ;-)

by the way, knallgrau isn't in any way related to silbergrau and/or blaugrau, or is it? (the diversity of austrian IT businesses confuses me.)

Using GPL for web applications is nearly useless, since you can run modified/enhanced versions without publishing the modifications/enhancements. You're only bound to distribute your changes in source code if you distribute the software itself, but you can run a web service for millions of people without distributing the server software.

But it's also a deliberate decision to be as business-friendly as possible, i.e. to let people do whatever they want with the code with very very few restrictions. This is the Apache school of thought, which as the GNU school of thoughts has lots of followers and fans. It's basically a matter of trust in the fact that not everybody out there is out to screw you over.

interesting point about the difference between cient-side apps and web apps, haven't thought of that before. or generally about what licence i'd use, because i couldn't decide that myself when i worked on commercial software, and my private projects aren't that far yet.

anyway, i've used several apache/jakarta sub-projects myself and quite like the license. RMS would protest, but i'm very okay with that ;-)

hm, das kann ich mir aber nur schwer vorstellen, da wir ja ganz andere cookieDomains verwenden. koenntest du das bitte nochmals ueberpruefen (da ich dieses Verhalten nicht nachvollziehen kann), und falls dem tatsaechlich so ist, sagen welchen Browser du verwendest. danke.

kann das Problem jetzt nicht mehr nachvollziehen. Seltsam, weil ich hier nie etwas Bug nenne, ohne mehrfach zu testen, seit ich das zweite Mal unter den teppich kreichen musste. Macht aber nix, Hauptsache es funkt.

are the defauft templates copyrightet? i like them more than the original ones.

Michi, are there any changes needed in the story create/edit code to adopt to the twoday.net story editor?

well, i managed to leave the evalStory() and evalNewStory() untouched, and "preprocess" the form accordingly before these functions are called. i collected (hopefully) all the relevant changes regarding the story editor here: StoryEditorDiffs (text/plain, 6 KB)

(i hope the diff's are somewhat readable for you; there is no sexy webinterface i can offer you like adele does)

basically yes, except that

1. i do not store the "http://" in the property, but rather prepend it in the site/href.skin
2. i use a different naming for the macro
3. the macro delivers this.alias+"."+getProperty("domain") as a default (i.e. produces for example m.twoday.net)

well, there is one small, but quite problematic issue remaining when thinking about running multiple domains with antville: the cookieDomain! if you want to have users run their weblog under a certain subdomain, but don't want to force them to login for each seperate subdomain, it is necessary (like it is done on antville.org) to set the cookieDomain to sthg like .antville.org. but this does not work for the sites running under a seperate domain, since cookies with a different cookieDomain than the requested Domain are afaik generally prohibited. so, my first solution would have been to run 2 seperate instances of the antville-application which share the same code base and same database, but then they would have to use a different object caches, which leads to troubles. so, the question is: is there any possibility at all of making the setting of the cookieDomain scriptable from within the application?

Since 1.2 pre4 there is a way for manually setting the cookie domain. These are the setCookie() functions available in the response object:

res.setCookie (String key, String value)

res.setCookie (String key, String value, int days)

res.setCookie (String key, String value, int days, String path)

res.setCookie (String key, String value, int days, String path, String domain)

However, things are different for the HopSession cookie, which is set automatically. I'll do a quick check to see if Jetty is smart enough to reject invalid cookie domains...

ad 11) why don't you use rawimage.getContentLength() for getting the size of the image instead of creating a file-object?

ad diskUsage(): what about a new property for site which gets incremented with every image/file-upload and decremented with every file/image-delete? actually i think two properties (one for images, one for files) would be even better (then we could display this in sysmgr too).

ad 11) ..because the image usually gets resized, and therefore the actuall storage size tends to be quite a bit smaller than the uploaded image itself

ad diskUsage: yes, this would be definitely the way to go