Hi Peter, The arguments that you and Colin put forth for using http instead of ftp for the RASCAL backend make sense. However at this point I am interested in having a working prototype of VULab so that the community can get a better sense of what we are trying to do with the application. Secondly we don't really know if the local screen capture approach we are taking with RASCAL is one that is practical so we need to test the concept before investing much more time in it. (Recall that we have another different option proposed by my colleague Tuan for using a thin client and doing the recording on the server.) Therefore, I would like to propose that we keep the ftp approach so that we will have a working application that we can try out now. If you don't want to run ftp on the York server, then I suppose we can keep it on the test server and run the web component on the York server. David is planning the architecture now for the http approach and will share this with the community before he begins any development. Do you see any problems with what I'm proposing? Ron
_______________________________________________ fluid-work mailing list [email protected] http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
