Re: Bug#590053: global.cgi fails to work with id-utils extension.

[Shigio YAMAGUCHI]

Hi,
> I think if we change from having a generated cgi, to having a static
> ready to go script, then we can in fact have more than one of these.
> Almost all of the things that are currently substituted there would
> be better done with CSS today - which really leaves us only the most
> fundamental conflict of simplicity (and obvious security) vs greater
> versatility to deal with.

Static CGI script is already possible. Since htags generates CSS based
hypertext by default, you can provide static CGI script (and CSS file
if needed).

> We can provide both a very simple script and a more complex one as
> examples, and the user can select whichever they find more appropriate
> to their particular needs.  The packages can provide a default config,
> if they use the complex one, which makes it the equivalent of the simple
> and safe one in its initially installed form.

I agree about the point that many CGI scripts should exist.
However, each script should be released by the author under his responsibility.
Complex scripts tends to have security holes.

> We three cannot guess all the things that people might find useful to
> add to this.  But we can provide good examples for them to begin their
> modifications from.  And accept the good ideas to further share.

I think that the specification of a system is what the author should press
it against the users. There is no specification that satisfies everyone.
So, 'good examples' also cannot satisfies everyone.
--
Shigio YAMAGUCHI <address@hidden>
PGP fingerprint: D1CB 0B89 B346 4AB6 5663  C4B6 3CA5 BBB3 57BE DDA3