Tuesday, March 16, 2010

All locked up and nowhere to go (Lotus Sandbox Composite Application Component Library examples)


The password still hasn’t been furnished for the Composite Application Component Library samples/demos, submitted to the Lotus Sandbox by Lotus/IBM in November 2007.

Two people asked for the password to be supplied (way back in December 2007 and January 2008)  but no response ever seems to have been made.

I just downloaded and checked, expecting it to have been fixed (as there are no more recent requests since then), but the zip file still prompts for a password.

<cynicism>
Every item in the sandbox is denoted with “All Sandbox downloads are licensed as-is, unsupported, and non-warranted” so It looks as if this extends to never checking that your submission can actually be opened and never watching to see if there are questions to be answered.
</cynicism>

Come on fellas, get your act together.

3 comments:

  1. Why not just get it from over here?

    http://www.openntf.org/Projects/pmt.nsf/ProjectLookup/Composite%20Application%20Component%20Library

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just downloaded it and the word document supplied with the .nsf clearly states to enter the password "I accept" to extract.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Nate. Thanks for the alternative link at OpenNTF, I hadn't noticed that one before. (Compared with a few years ago, the OpenNTF site is beginning to get so much good stuff in it that it's becoming hard to follow everything that's available there.)

    I'm happy to see that OpenNTF has an updated Version 2 (clv2.zip) compared with the original put in the Lotus Sandbox in 2007 (ComponentLibrary.zip).

    @Tom, it's all a bit weird. I couldn't open the original ComponentLibrary.zip to begin with, since it required a password in order to access the Word doc that (as you rightly say) tells what the password is. But when I used another zip program, it did open! Beats me!

    Back on that Lotus Sandbox page it indicates "Additional reviews and comments disabled" which is a pity, because I would have added a comment explaining what the two of you have told me, thereby averting frustration by others who might stumble upon this out-of-date page (unaware that there's a better version at OpenNTF).

    ReplyDelete