[REBOL] SDK FAQ? Re: Re: time to read
From: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 3-Dec-2002 11:20
Gregg Irwin wrote:
Except the woo-hoo, wow etc., there is plenty of questions arising
though :-) Maybe some of them could become part of SDK FAQ?
- unset-reg-funcs could be none by default ... but not a big problem to
have it included all the time ... (this one is for us, registry haters
and does not necessarily needs to be answered :-)
now to products:
- what is the future of /View, /Core and /Command products in regards to
SDK aproach? Will they further exist?
- does SDK license allows us to install /Base + some additional scripts
(sources) taken from SDK into web-server space e.g.? I don't see it
reliable to build encapped app for every cgi script I may wish to put
into webserver, while /Base provides us with faster booting, lower
memory requirements, etc.? Stating that - will /Base, /Face and /Pro
exist as separate products, or only for encapped-app purposes in terms
- docs say that /Pro is built upon /Base, including some of current
/View/Pro and /Command features (shell, library, fastcgi), but /Face
itself does not contain network protocols. If /Pro is supposed to be
used mainly in conjunction with CGI, how is it supposed to work without
network protocols? Or is the SDK strategy suggesting to Encap particular
CGI scripts rather than use Rebol interpreter to run non-encapped ones?
- can we regard /Face being a superset of /Base + /Pro, and compare it
to current /View/Command product? (except the differences of /Face and
/View, as VID and some mezzanine functions)?
- SKD docs say: "To run /Face, your SDK license.key file must be
provided. This is the same license.key file that is required to run the
encapsulation program and should not be distributed ..." - will there be
/Face product, not containing /Pro features, which can be distributed
withouth user license key, or just opposite - how are we supposed to
create end-user license keys? Is the procedure to ask RT for them?