On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Paul Hammant <p...@hammant.org> wrote: > > > I have little need for such a thing myself, so I’m just throwing this idea > > out > > there for anyone who thinks it looks like a good itch to scratch. > > I do have a need for this class of use. My thread "Fossil as an app server" > (nearly a week ago on this list) is in the same direction.
Only in the vaguest sort of way. My idea is just that you should be able to replace the fossil binary as a client with a series of HTTP calls, which lets you replace fossil-the-client without duplicating all of its internal functionality. This idea of turning Fossil into a generic application server is off on a completely wild tangent from that point. While thinking about this sort of thing, consider the XSS problem just brought up on the mailing list. To me, “generic application server” implies multiple independent — possibly mutually-untrusting — applications running on a single platform. So, you’d better solve the XSS problem first. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
