Re: ampache security audit

Bernd Zeimetz wrote: >> Could you please elaborate more on this statement: >> >> "Especially for such **insert curse words here** languages like php". >> >> Why do you feel that php is a **insert curse words here** language? >> >> > > It starts with a broken design of the language itself (f

Re: ampache security audit

> Could you please elaborate more on this statement: > > "Especially for such **insert curse words here** languages like php". > > Why do you feel that php is a **insert curse words here** language? > It starts with a broken design of the language itself (for example missing namespaces) and en

Re: ampache security audit

Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Wednesday 4 July 2007 06:28, Charlie wrote: > >> "Especially for such **insert curse words here** languages like php". >> >> Why do you feel that php is a **insert curse words here** language? >> >> If PHP is such a **insert curse words here** language, then why does

Re: ampache security audit

On Wednesday 4 July 2007 06:28, Charlie wrote: > "Especially for such **insert curse words here** languages like php". > > Why do you feel that php is a **insert curse words here** language? > > If PHP is such a **insert curse words here** language, then why does Debian > allow apps such as roundcu

RE: ampache security audit

Dear Mr. Bernd Zeimetz Thank you for your comments > > You can look at ampaches Code Philosophy at > > https://ampache.bountysource.com/wiki/Code_Philosophy > > > > and ampaches Coding Standards at > > https://ampache.bountysource.com/wiki/Coding_Standards > that's nice to read, but people

Re: ampache security audit

Hi, > You can look at ampaches Code Philosophy at > https://ampache.bountysource.com/wiki/Code_Philosophy > > and ampaches Coding Standards at > https://ampache.bountysource.com/wiki/Coding_Standards that's nice to read, but people who write the code should not audit it imho. It's like reading