jeremy at jenacon.net
Tue Dec 14 07:18:42 PST 2004
> Oh, I think we are quite close. Lets bring it up. I think more
> verbiage in the srs is in order. We just need to find a good place to
> put it. Probably in the main section 3 somewhere.
You mean bring it up as a proposal to the LFS editors? We could... If
we get shot down, I don't think this would hinder our using the book -
we'd just have to maintain the diffs as I said. For the actual wording
of the SRS, NeoCool is probably the one to talk to, though I might be
able to help if necessary.
> I would think for the daemon that C is the best choice. One of the
> great things about implementing a true client/server model is that the
> client can be written in any language. We should provide a ncurses
> console based one written in C as well, but that does not prevent
> someone from writing one in Python or C using the X libraries or
> something (heck, can we provide that too?)
Well, C it is then. At least for the back-end, the meat of the tool.
> I agree with Jamie that SOAP is probably our best bet at this time. It
> has been around for a few years (4 I believe) and is quite mature and
> uses XML.
Ok, so can we get someone to start defining exactly how SOAP will
interact between the back-end and the front?
More information about the alfs-discuss