troed wrote:Ah, so you weren't commenting on there being any missing files at all (they're all there), but that the server side search functionality isn't exactly the same.
This is the problem with leeching sites with wget. You only get what you see. If you wget atari-forum.com, do you get a functional clone of this forum?
So where is this file on your copy? And believe me, you've got loads of these cases.
Recently me and a friend took over the maintenance of a rather big site covering an obscure 8-bit system. Before taking on this I wget'ed the original site to have a look at what was there. And the copy did not even work. And what's more, the copy was 1.3Gb while actual site I received a few days later was 1.8Gb. That's a lot of 8-bit stuff missed by wget!
troed wrote:That's correct, apparently Lonny threw the biggest hissy fit over Exxos asking if he could use the existing one instead of writing his own. I spent five minutes on mine so far, but I intend for it to also be able to search within the file contents. Maybe you could complain on Lonny's site being "broken" and incomplete then?
If you make your own site - your own HTML, your own database, your own php-code - to index these documents then that's something else. Now you have only copied the files and the appearance from Lonny's site, calling it a "mirror" when it is in fact a broken snapshot. It's perfectly understandable that Lonny does not like these pages that claims to be representative for his work.
joska wrote:publish copies of his work
One of the files on the site is Doit_Archives-ELiTE_2006.zip. Now, as can be guessed from the filename this isn't really "Lonny's work". It's an Elite crack of the well known Doit archives. I'm not sure what the opinion was in 2006, but when I cracked the DoitST archive in 2000 it was not appreciated at all by its authors.
The well-supported, active Doit archives? Your point is? The big majority of the docs on dev-docs are copyrighted. That's a reality when dealing with retro computers, and to my knowledge Lonny has never claimed copyright for these. But there is a big difference between active, supported sites and abandoned sites/projects. The latter must be copied/mirrored/preserved as far as possible because they are bound to disappear.
troed wrote:But I never tried to claim it was "my work" at least
We all know that you did this to prove a point. And you did - you created a copy with the same deficiencies as exxos did because you did not understand what you were copying.
If Lonny wanted a mirror of his site then I'm sure he would have been happy to mirror the actual site somewhere. But he's not interested. And he's definitely not interested in broken copies popping up, claiming to be a "mirror" of his own work. Please respect that.
(Edit: Fixed order of screenshots.)
(Edit 2: My example was wrong, I had made a typo in the URL. Sorry about that. Example replaced.)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.