[REBOL] Re: RFC: A messaging kernel
From: maarten::koopmans::surfnet::nl at: 31-Dec-2002 10:50
> yes, something like that IS needed imo. I just would like to ask - why
> don't you try to contact DocKimbel to send you beta of Uniserve?
> Uniserve seems to be something like protocol multiplex engine - you have
> services installed, which use modules, e.g. httpd service, which can use
> CGI or fastCGI etc module. There is more to Uniserve than what I am able
> to describe here.
>
I know, and Doc is very good, but....
> What I currently lack with Uniserve is - client side of things .... I
> think that it should turn into P2P solution (and according to Doc, it
> hopefully will), as it currently lacks imo unified tracking of client
> side stuff also (I mean opened ports on client).
>
Exactly. So it would fill in only half of the picture, and it is not
released and....
> Uniserve can be good competition to Python's Medusa and I think that
> later on, RT could decide to license it for SDK, as it can take Rebol
> networking one step further ...
... it would be nothing more than a server io engine to me. I already
have a very well tested, widely used engine myself: hipe, the one from
Rugby.
1) Well tested for almost two years, nice installed base via Rugby.
2) I control it and know it inside-out.
The other point is that where Uniserve is a protocol framework that is
exactly what I want to move away from with Rebol. The power of messaging
and dialects can be used as protocols. The messaging engine will help
you with the networking part.
> So - I would like to see community cooperation upon one as much as
> possible universal project, than later on deciding between two systems,
> while both of them lacking certain feature here or there ...
>
And this is a repeating argument from your side. Why Rugby if we get IOS
and RMP (1.5 years ago)? Why not integrate Rugby with Uniserve (last
year). Why....?
So although I will follow Uniserv with great interest once it becomes
publicly available: no, thanks for now.
--TPFKAMK
