Jeremy Huntwork jeremy at
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?

Jeremy Huntwork

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list