Search Results

Search found 3250 results on 130 pages for 'peer review'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 22/130 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • Code review “on a napkin” — could it be useful?

    - by gaRex
    Preconditions Team uses DVCS IDE supports comments parsing (like TODO and etc.) Tools like CodeCollaborator are expensive for budget Tools like gerrit are too complex for install or not usable Workflow Author publishes somewhere on central repo feature branch Reviewer fetch it and start review In case of some question/issue reviewer create comment with special label, like "BLA". Such label MUST not be in production code -- only on review stage: $somevar = 123; // BLA Why do echo this here? echo $somevar; When reviewer finish post comments -- it just commits with stupid message "comments" and pushes back Author pulls feature branch back and answer comments in similar way or improve code and push it back When "BLA" comments have gone we can think, that review has successfully finished. Author interactively rebases feature branch, stashes it to remove those "comment" commits and now is ready to merge feature to develop or make any action that usualy could be after successful internal review IDE support I know, that custom comment tags are possible in eclipse & netbeans. Sure it also should be in blablaStorm family. So my specific questions are Do you think this methodology is viable? Do you know something similar? What can be improved in it? ps: migrated from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12692695/code-review-on-a-napkin-could-it-be-useful

    Read the article

  • Code review process when using GIT as a repository?

    - by Sid
    What is the best process for code review when using GIT? Current process: We have a GIT server with a master branch to which everyone commits Devs work off the local master mirror or a local feature branch Devs commit to server's master branch Devs request code review on last commit Problem: Any bug in code review are already in master by the time it's caught. Worse, usually someone has burnt a few hours trying to figure out what happened... So, we would like To do code review BEFORE delivery into the 'master'. Have a process that works with a global team (no over the shoulder reviews!) something that doesn't require an individual dev to be at his desk/machine to be powered up so someone else can remote in (remove human dependency, devs go home at different timezones) We use TortoiseGIT for a visual representation of a list of files changed, diff'ing files etc. Some of us drop into a GIT shell when the GUI isn't enough, but ideally we'd like the workflow to be simple and GUI based (I want the tool to lift any burden, not my devs).

    Read the article

  • Code reviews for larger MVC.NET team using TFS

    - by Parrots
    I'm trying to find a good code review workflow for my team. Most questions similar to this on SO revolve around using shelved changes for the review, however I'm curious about how this works for people with larger teams. We usually have 2-3 people working a story (UI person, Domain/Repository person, sometimes DB person). I've recommended the shelf idea but we're all concerned about how to manage that with multiple people working the same feature. How could you share a shelf between multiple programmers at that point? We worry it would be clunky and we might easily have unintended consequences moving to this workflow. Of course moving to shelfs for each feature avoids having 10 or so checkins per feature (as developers need to share code) making seeing the diffs at code review time painful. Has anyone else been able to successfully deal with this? Are there any tools out there people have found useful aside from shelfs in TFS (preferably open-source)?

    Read the article

  • What should be done first: Code reviews or Unit tests?

    - by goldenmean
    Hello, If a developer implements code for some module and wants to get it reviewed. What should be the order : *First unit test the module after designing test cases for the module, debugging and fixing the bugs and then give the modified code for peer code review (Pros- Code to be reviewed is 'clean' to a good extent. Reduces some avoidable review comments and rework. Cons- Developer might spend large time debugging/fixing a bug which could have pointed/anticipated in peer code reviews) Or *First do the code review with peers and then go for unit testing. What are your thoughts/experience on this? I believe this approach for unit testing, code reviewing should be programming language agnostic, but it would be interesting to know otherwise(if applicable) with specific examples. -AD

    Read the article

  • Code reviews for larger ASP.NET MVC team using TFS

    - by Parrots
    I'm trying to find a good code review workflow for my team. Most questions similar to this on SO revolve around using shelved changes for the review, however I'm curious about how this works for people with larger teams. We usually have 2-3 people working a story (UI person, Domain/Repository person, sometimes DB person). I've recommended the shelf idea but we're all concerned about how to manage that with multiple people working the same feature. How could you share a shelf between multiple programmers at that point? We worry it would be clunky and we might easily have unintended consequences moving to this workflow. Of course moving to shelfs for each feature avoids having 10 or so checkins per feature (as developers need to share code) making seeing the diffs at code review time painful. Has anyone else been able to successfully deal with this? Are there any tools out there people have found useful aside from shelfs in TFS (preferably open-source)?

    Read the article

  • The best dvd ripper software in 2014 review

    - by user328170
    The top 3 DVD Ripping Tools in 2014 Nowadays everyone may have several smart mobile devices, such as iphone, ipad air, ipad mini ,Samsung Galaxy and Sony Xperia. If you want to take your movies with your mobile devices, or sometimes just want to backup those classic physical discs on your notebook or workstation with high quality resolutions, you need a fast and stable software to rip them and convert them to the format you like. Fortunately, there are plenty of great software products designed to make the process easy and transform DVD to the files that are playable on any mobile device you choose. We have done a full review on dozens of products. Here are five of the best, based on our review. We test the software from its ripping speed, friendly use guide , reliability and ripping capability. The top one is still Winx DVD Ripper platinum. We've test its 6.1 version 2 years ago for its ability to quickly and easily rip DVDs and Blu-ray discs to high quality MKV files with a single click. It gave us deep impression in the test. This time we test it’s lastest 7.3.5 version. Besides easy use and speed, we test its capability to decrypt all kinds of discs with different protect method, for example, Disney X-project DRM , Sony ArccOS, RCE and region code. The result shows that winx dvd ripper platinum still maintain its advantages in all the area. Winx dvd ripper platinum is a more focused on DVD ripping software with the basic duty to rip and convert DVD. The color of UI is a modern technical sense. All the main functions are shown obviously while others specials are hidden for advanced users, making it more clear and convenient to make option. There are two company weisoft limited and Digiarty who can provide the software. Weisoft limited focus on USA, UK and Australia market. Digiarty focus on others. ripping speed ????? friendly use guide ????? reliability ????? ripping capability ????? The second one DVDFab DVDFab is also very robust during ripping dics. It can also decrypt most of the dics in the market. The shortage it still friendly use and speed. We'd note that the app is frequently updated to cut through the copy protection on even the latest DVDs and Blu-ray discs . The app is shareware, meaning most features are free, including decrypting and ripping to your hard drive. Many of you note that you use another app for compression and authoring, but many of you say they hey, storage is cheap, and the rips from DVDFab are easy, one-click, and work. ripping speed ??? friendly use guide ???? reliability ????? ripping capability ????? The Third one is Handbrake Handbrake is our favorite video encoder for a reason: it's simple, easy to use, easy to install, and offers a lots of options to get the high quality file as a result. If you're scared by them, you don't even have to use them—the app will compensate for you and pick some settings it thinks you'll like based on your destination device. So many of you like Handbrake that many of you use it in conjunction with another app (like VLC, which makes ripping easy)—you'll let another app do the rip and crack the DRM on your discs, and then process the file through Handbrake for encoding. The app is fast, can make the most of multi-core processors to speed up the process, and is completely open source. ripping speed ??? friendly use guide ???? reliability ???? ripping capability ????

    Read the article

  • Hardware Raid Card Reviews with SSDs

    - by Nalandial
    Yes I realize there are several questions about this but none of them seem to have the answer I'm looking for. I have two SSDs and am looking to buy a purely hardware raid card for them; however, I can't seem to find any reviews that have specifically tested hardware raid cards with SSDs rather than testing the SSDs themselves. I'm looking for a review because I'm assuming that for example: 100% gain with two 7200rpm drives doesn't necessarily mean 100% gain with a pair of SSDs, since there would be higher speeds, meaning more throughput, meaning more processor/memory usage for the card. If this assumption is wrong then that's fantastic; however if it's true, I am quite sad and would really appreciate any advice or reviews you can find. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Reviewing firewall rules

    - by chmeee
    I need to review firewall rules of a CheckPoint firewall for a customer (with 200+ rules). I have used FWDoc in the past to extract the rules and convert them to other formats but there was some errors with exclusions. I then analyze them manually to produce an improved version of the rules (usually in OOo Calc) with comments. I know there are several visualization techniques but they all go down to analyzing the traffic and I want static analysis. So I was wondering, what process do you follow to analyze firewall rules? What tools do you use (not only for Checkpoint)?

    Read the article

  • PHP 5.3.2 + Fcgid 2.3.5 + Apache 2.2.14 + SuExec => Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server

    - by Zigzag
    I'm trying to use PHP 5.3.2 + Fcgid 2.3.5 + Apache 2.2.14 but I always have the error : "Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server". And Apache returns an error 500 each time I tried to execute a php page : I have compiled the Apache with this options: ./configure --with-mpm=worker --enable-userdir=shared --enable-actions=shared --enable-alias=shared --enable-auth=shared --enable-so --enable-deflate \ --enable-cache=shared --enable-disk-cache=shared --enable-info=shared --enable-rewrite=shared \ --enable-suexec=shared --with-suexec-caller=www-data --with-suexec-userdir=site --with-suexec-logfile=/usr/local/apache2/logs/suexec.log --with-suexec-docroot=/home Then PHP: ./configure --with-config-file-path=/usr/local/apache2/php --with-apxs2=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs --with-mysql --with-zlib --enable-exif --with-gd --enable-cgi Then FCdigd: APXS=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs ./configure.apxs The VHOST is: <Directory /home/website_panel/site/> FCGIWrapper /home/website_panel/cgi/php .php ... ErrorLog /home/website_panel/logs/error.log </Directory> cat /home/website_panel/logs/error.log [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:42 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:42 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:43 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:43 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php The Suexec log: root:/usr/local/apache2# cat /var/log/apache2/suexec.log [2010-03-07 22:11:05]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:11:15]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:11:23]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:41]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:41]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:42]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:43]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php root:/usr/local/apache2# cat logs/error_log [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] suEXEC mechanism enabled (wrapper: /usr/local/apache2/bin/suexec) [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] mod_bw : Memory Allocated 0 bytes (each conf takes 32 bytes) [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] mod_bw : Version 0.7 - Initialized [0 Confs] [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] Apache/2.2.14 (Unix) mod_fcgid/2.3.5 configured -- resuming normal operations root:/usr/local/apache2# /home/website_panel/cgi/php -v PHP 5.3.2 (cli) (built: Mar 7 2010 16:01:49) Copyright (c) 1997-2010 The PHP Group Zend Engine v2.3.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2010 Zend Technologies If someone has got an idea, I want to hear it ^^ Thanks !

    Read the article

  • PHP 5.3.2 + Fcgid 2.3.5 + Apache 2.2.14 + SuExec => Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error readi

    - by Zigzag
    Hi, I'm trying to use PHP 5.3.2 + Fcgid 2.3.5 + Apache 2.2.14 but I always have the error : "Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server". And Apache returns an error 500 each time I tried to execute a php page : I have compiled the Apache with this options: ./configure --with-mpm=worker --enable-userdir=shared --enable-actions=shared --enable-alias=shared --enable-auth=shared --enable-so --enable-deflate \ --enable-cache=shared --enable-disk-cache=shared --enable-info=shared --enable-rewrite=shared \ --enable-suexec=shared --with-suexec-caller=www-data --with-suexec-userdir=site --with-suexec-logfile=/usr/local/apache2/logs/suexec.log --with-suexec-docroot=/home Then PHP: ./configure --with-config-file-path=/usr/local/apache2/php --with-apxs2=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs --with-mysql --with-zlib --enable-exif --with-gd --enable-cgi Then FCdigd: APXS=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs ./configure.apxs The VHOST is: <Directory /home/website_panel/site/> FCGIWrapper /home/website_panel/cgi/php .php ... ErrorLog /home/website_panel/logs/error.log </Directory> cat /home/website_panel/logs/error.log [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:41 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:42 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:42 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php [Sun Mar 07 22:19:43 2010] [warn] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Sun Mar 07 22:19:43 2010] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] Premature end of script headers: test.php The Suexec log: root:/usr/local/apache2# cat /var/log/apache2/suexec.log [2010-03-07 22:11:05]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:11:15]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:11:23]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:41]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:41]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:42]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php [2010-03-07 22:19:43]: uid: (1001/website_panel) gid: (1001/website_panel) cmd: php root:/usr/local/apache2# cat logs/error_log [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] suEXEC mechanism enabled (wrapper: /usr/local/apache2/bin/suexec) [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] mod_bw : Memory Allocated 0 bytes (each conf takes 32 bytes) [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] mod_bw : Version 0.7 - Initialized [0 Confs] [Sun Mar 07 22:18:47 2010] [notice] Apache/2.2.14 (Unix) mod_fcgid/2.3.5 configured -- resuming normal operations root:/usr/local/apache2# /home/website_panel/cgi/php -v PHP 5.3.2 (cli) (built: Mar 7 2010 16:01:49) Copyright (c) 1997-2010 The PHP Group Zend Engine v2.3.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2010 Zend Technologies If someone has got an idea, I want to hear it ^^ Thanks !

    Read the article

  • where to get a wordpress theme review

    - by Ayrton
    Hi I'm currently developing some Wordpress templates and I wanted to get a review by a (semi)professional. I already know quite a bit about Wordpress,CSS, & JS but I was always a lone wolf without any guidance that's why I was wondering where I could find someone (trustworthy) to do something like this and how much he should charge me. It's pure about the code (the PHP, JS & the CSS) I would like to have a review on about (nothing design related). A link to the Wordpress theme I'm talking about: http://demo.wpmonk.com Yours truthfully

    Read the article

  • Restaurant review site in SharePoint

    - by Sisiutl
    I'm totally new to SharePoint but my company has adopted it for internal use. As a learning exercise I thought it would be fun to create a local restaurant review site. Can anyone point me to an example or tutorial to get me started? What I have in mind is a simple site where users can enter the restaurant name, cuisine style, address, a simple 5 point rating and price scale, and a short review. Other users could search for restaurants by cuisine and add their own reviews. We have SharePoint 2007 and MOSS. Thanks

    Read the article

  • why licenced code is packed and then is reviewable using Disassembler at the same time ?

    - by Asad Butt
    Is it legal / ethical to copy code for any reason, or utilize it (like code review) from the .Net framework or any other .Net based API using Reflector or similar tools ? If it is, what advantages do Microsoft and other licence based softwares have for packing there code ? If it is not, Why can we use ILDasm and Reflector ? Another way of saying this is Why to pack it up if it is fine to review it ? probably I am missing some bits in the question, any one who feels, could ask this question in a better way, is most welcome to edit. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to keep code maintainable after original programmer quit

    - by Stan
    Say if it's a 10 people project, 2-3 of the original programmer quit after the project has been release a stable version for a while. How to have the code maintainable in this case? My imagination is reviewing the code after the project goes to release version and keep review it afterwards? Maybe split into 2-3 small groups and have each group review part of the code. So at least 3-4 people are familiar with part of code. Does this work? How do companies deal with this issue? Usually how many percentage of time spent on reviewing the code? Please advise, thanks to community.

    Read the article

  • Asterisk: Forcing a sip peer to connect via ipv6?

    - by growse
    I've got an asterisk server that connects to an upstream provider over a WAN. The upstream provider supports both IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, and the asterisk server is behind a NAT. When asterisk connects to the upstream sip peer via IPv6, everything works perfectly. The issue I have is that when I configure the asterisk server IPv6 address via DHCPv6, a race condition means that asterisk sometimes ends up attempting to contact the upstream peer via IPv4 (the SIP DNS name has both A and AAAA records). This is because asterisk starts up before the system has a valid IPv6 address. The connection does not work via IPv4 because of the NAT. Is there a way of configuring the peer to specify that it should only be contactable over IPv6? I guess it might be possible to hack together a firewall rule to deny all IPv4 traffic to that IP, but it'd be easier to configure this within asterisk itself.

    Read the article

  • Is a code review which uses only code comments a good idea?

    - by gaRex
    Preconditions Team uses DVCS IDE supports comments parsing (like TODO and etc.) Tools like CodeCollaborator are expensive for budget Tools like gerrit are too complex for install or not usable Workflow Author publishes somewhere on central repo feature branch Reviewer fetch it and start review In case of some question/issue reviewer create comment with special label, like "REV". Such label MUST not be in production code -- only on review stage: $somevar = 123; // REV Why do echo this here? echo $somevar; When reviewer finish post comments -- it just commits with stupid message "comments" and pushes back Author pulls feature branch back and answer comments in similar way or improve code and push it back When "REV" comments have gone we can think, that review has successfully finished. Author interactively rebases feature branch, squashes it to remove those "comment" commits and now is ready to merge feature to develop or make any action that usualy could be after successful internal review IDE support I know, that custom comment tags are possible in eclipse & netbeans. Sure it also should be in blablaStorm family. Questions Do you think this methodology is viable? Do you know something similar? What can be improved in it?

    Read the article

  • Security review of an authenticated Diffie Hellman variant

    - by mtraut
    EDIT I'm still hoping for some advice on this, i tried to clarify my intentions... When i came upon device pairing in my mobile communication framework i studied a lot of papers on this topic and and also got some input from previous questions here. But, i didn't find a ready to implement protocol solution - so i invented a derivate and as i'm no crypto geek i'm not sure about the security caveats of the final solution: The main questions are Is SHA256 sufficient as a commit function? Is the addition of the shared secret as an authentication info in the commit string safe? What is the overall security of the 1024 bit group DH I assume at most 2^-24 bit probability of succesful MITM attack (because of 24 bit challenge). Is this plausible? What may be the most promising attack (besides ripping the device out off my numb, cold hands) This is the algorithm sketch For first time pairing, a solution proposed in "Key agreement in peer-to-peer wireless networks" (DH-SC) is implemented. I based it on a commitment derived from: A fix "UUID" for the communicating entity/role (128 bit, sent at protocol start, before commitment) The public DH key (192 bit private key, based on the 1024 bit Oakley group) A 24 bit random challenge Commit is computed using SHA256 c = sha256( UUID || DH pub || Chall) Both parties exchange this commitment, open and transfer the plain content of the above values. The 24 bit random is displayed to the user for manual authentication DH session key (128 bytes, see above) is computed When the user opts for persistent pairing, the session key is stored with the remote UUID as a shared secret Next time devices connect, commit is computed by additionally hashing the previous DH session key before the random challenge. For sure it is not transfered when opening. c = sha256( UUID || DH pub || DH sess || Chall) Now the user is not bothered authenticating when the local party can derive the same commitment using his own, stored previous DH session key. After succesful connection the new DH session key becomes the new shared secret. As this does not exactly fit the protocols i found so far (and as such their security proofs), i'd be very interested to get an opinion from some more crypto enabled guys here. BTW. i did read about the "EKE" protocol, but i'm not sure what the extra security level is.

    Read the article

  • iphone - direct link to iPhone review form from inside iphone

    - by Mike
    I am trying to link directly to the review link of one of my Apps. I know that it is possible because Appirater did it in the past, but some change in iTunes turned the API down. Appirater uses this URL NSString *templateReviewURL = @"itms-apps://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewContentsUserReviews?id=APP_ID&onlyLatestVersion=true&pageNumber=0&sortOrdering=1&type=Purple+Software"; where APP_ID is the ID of an application. running this from inside the APP gives me the message Cannot Connect to iTunes Store. This Page talks about another kind of link https://userpub.itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZUserPublishing.woa/wa/addUserReview?id=APP_ID&type=Purple+Software and also itms-apps://ax.itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewContentsUserReviews?type=Purple+Software&id=APP_ID The first one works, but just from the desktop mac. The second gives me the same error as the first... Cannot Connect to iTunes Store. iTunes link maker is not helping too, because it has no tools for iPad links... Do you guys know how to link to an app's review form from inside an app? In case you don't know, what kind of package should I use to dig this? a package sniffer? thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • review count and rating using an image - schema.org

    - by Joel
    I need some help getting some rich snippets to my site I inserted the review microdata following the instructions given on schema.org here http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_missing using the star-image for rating and the text for review count, but testing it with the test tool it showed nothing. Example page where we use the microdata for the reviews. and here is what I used <div itemprop="reviews" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/AggregateRating"> <A HREF="javascript:an();"><img src="/images/stars/4.5.gif" border=0></a> <meta itemprop="ratingValue" content="4.5" /> <meta itemprop="bestRating" content="5" /> <BR><span class="bottomnavfooter"><A HREF="javascript:an();">Read (<span itemprop="ratingCount">70</span>) Reviews</A </span></div> I then created a static test page and made some change using instructions Google provided here http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=172705 (which is different from what I found on schema.org!!) but still the test returned only product name not the price or the reviews. Here is my test page - Can you please see where I'm going wrong Thanks much!!

    Read the article

  • Microsoft DNS :: Review Traffic Data?

    - by BSI Support
    I have primary and secondary (public) DNS servers running Microsoft DNS. Windows 2003. Would like any suggestions on software for DNS log analysis. At the moment, I'm curious to see which domains are being requested, in an effort to clean-up old Registrar-based name server settings (which I do not have access to change, myself.) Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Secondary DHCP server won't start on Centos 6.2

    - by Slowjoe
    I'm trying to create a backup DHCP server. Server times are in sync. Primary server starts fine. Secondary server won't start. Error from /var/log/messages is: Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Copyright 2004-2010 Internet Systems Consortium. Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: All rights reserved. Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: For info, please visit https://www.isc.org/software/dhcp/ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf line 25: invalid statement in peer declaration Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: #011max-response-default Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: ^ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf line 41: failover peer dhcp-failover: not found Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: failover peer "dhcp-failover" Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: ^ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf line 49: failover peer dhcp-failover: not found Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: failover peer "dhcp-failover" Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: ^ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: WARNING: Host declarations are global. They are not limited to the scope you declared them in. Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf line 70: failover peer dhcp-failover: not found Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: failover peer "dhcp-failover" Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: ^ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf line 78: failover peer dhcp-failover: not found Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: failover peer "dhcp-failover" Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: ^ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Configuration file errors encountered -- exiting Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: This version of ISC DHCP is based on the release available Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: on ftp.isc.org. Features have been added and other changes Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: have been made to the base software release in order to make Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: it work better with this distribution. Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Please report for this software via the CentOS Bugs Database: Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: http://bugs.centos.org/ Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: Sep 15 14:47:45 stream dhcpd: exiting. Config file contents: # DHCP Server Configuration file. # see /usr/share/doc/dhcp*/dhcpd.conf.sample # see 'man 5 dhcpd.conf' # option domain-name "eng.foo.com"; option domain-name-servers ns0.eng.foo.com, ns1.eng.foo.com; option ntp-servers ntp.eng.foo.com; #option time-servers ntp.eng.foo.com; default-lease-time 3600; max-lease-time 7200; authoritative; log-facility local7; failover peer "dhcp-failover" { secondary; address 10.0.1.70; port 647; peer address 10.0.1.11; peer port 647; max-response-default 30; max-unacked-updates 10; load balance max seconds 3; } # # Management subnet # subnet 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0; option broadcast-address 10.0.0.255; option routers 10.0.0.1; option domain-search "eng.foo.com", "foo.com"; # Unknown clients get this pool pool { failover peer "dhcp-failover"; max-lease-time 300; range 10.0.0.240 10.0.0.249; allow unknown-clients; } # Known clients get this pool pool { failover peer "dhcp-failover"; max-lease-time 28800; range 10.0.0.150 10.0.0.199; deny unknown-clients; } include "/etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf-engmgmt"; } # # Data subnet # subnet 10.0.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0; option broadcast-address 10.0.1.255; option routers 10.0.1.1; option domain-search "eng.foo.com", "foo.com"; # Unknown clients get this pool pool { failover peer "dhcp-failover"; max-lease-time 300; range 10.0.1.240 10.0.1.249; allow unknown-clients; } # Known clients get this pool pool { failover peer "dhcp-failover"; max-lease-time 28800; range 10.0.1.150 10.0.1.199; deny unknown-clients; } # For centos network installs if substring (option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 8) = "anaconda" { filename "/autohome/distro/ks/"; next-server eng-data.eng.foo.com; } # For PXE network installs if substring (option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 9) = "PXEClient" { filename "pxelinux.0"; next-server eng-data.eng.foo.com; } # For KVM PXE network installs if substring (option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 9) = "Etherboot" { filename "pxelinux.0"; next-server eng-data.eng.foo.com; } include "/etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf-engdata"; }

    Read the article

  • Should my colleagues review each others code from source control system?

    - by Daniel Excinsky
    Hi everybody. So that's my story: one of my colleagues uses to review all the code, hosted to revision system. I'm not speaking about adequate review of changes in parts that he belongs to. He watches the code file to file, line to line. Every new file and every modified. I feel just like being spied on! My guess is that if code was already hosted to control system, you should trust it as workable at least. My question is, maybe I'm just too paranoiac and practice of reviewing each others code is good? P.S: We're team of only three developers, and I fear that if there will be more of us, colleague just won't have time to review all the the code we'll write.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between Static code analysis and code review?

    - by Xander
    I just wanted to know what is the difference between static code analysis and code review. How these two are done? What are the tools available today for code review/ static analysis of PHP. I also like to know about good tools for any language code review. Thanks in Advance. Xander Cage Note: I am asking this because I was not able to understand the difference. Please, I expect some answers than "I am Mr.Geek and you asked an irrelevant bla bla..... this is closed". I know this sounds mean. But I am sorry.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >