Another try

Jesse Tie Ten Quee highos at highos.com
Thu Jun 28 21:02:01 PDT 2001


Yo,

On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 09:04:28PM -0400, atark at thepipeline.net wrote:
> The XML syntax should be written in such a way that one could wirte a backend 
> in any language.  It's not that different than have an API for a programming 
> library.  It's a pretty basic concept.  An API is pretty abstract it's like a 
> black box, you know what goes in and what come out, but you do not care how 
> it gets done.  The backend is the black box.  Who cares how it is done as 
> long as it gets done?
 
Bingo my man, i've been waiting all week for someone to get this right.

We are not writting a scripting language in XML, and neither are we going
to reimplement bash in XML. (as some of the most recent posts seem to
imply)

We are however, putting the information in the profiles that an ALFS
implementation would need to get the job done, we are not telling it
*how* to get the job done, that's two very different things.

Anyways.. think about that for a second before even considering
responding.

There will always be a <command> (or something similar, right now it's
<system_command> in the perl implementations) but it should be something
only used in a very specific situation, imo.

(well, that doesn't really explain my afk'ish on the list, but i'll
spare you guys the details... i'll reply to everyone in a bit, food calls ;)

-- 
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to alfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list