Good ideas all. You sound like you're describing River On Rails. ;-). I've barely scratched the surface of what I want to do, so changing direction is now is easy.
Sent via mobile device, please forgive typos and spacing errors. On 11 Jan 2012 14:31, "Dennis Reedy" <dennis.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 11, 2012, at 920AM, Dan Creswell wrote: > > > > Alright, so what am I talking about? Convention over configuration - > > and there isn't enough of that in the starter kit. > > Excellent point. > > > > Once the common > > cases are taken care of, configuration becomes more of an exception > > than the rule and then there is motivation to dig deeper and do > > something more serious like use Groovy or whatever on the behalf of > > the individual that will help them get over the hill to something > > working. > > > > Simple cases? Maybe two boxes on the same LAN (thus one can use the > > subnet as a group name and make some reasonable assumptions about > > multicast) and maybe a single box with a correctly configured local > > loopback. > > Maybe: > > groups - default to user.name > multicast - assume available (warn if not) > > Dennis >
