I think the problem with sockets is that we then need to write code to parse the input. This will probably be error prone... but very portable :)
Do you know xmlrpc? It is working over sockets and we would ne have to parse anything... And it is ported to all unices (afaik) and even windows. But i dont have any experience with it... Another solution would be to use shared libraries, like the current multisync. But i like the idea to have the multisyncd deamon and the plugins separated. On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 17:50, David A. Desrosiers wrote: > > I think the most important thing to decide first is what transport to > > use (dbus, xmlrpc, sockets, etc). Any thoughts on this one? > > My vote is for sockets, for maximum portability between platforms. > > d. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Multisync-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/multisync-devel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Multisync-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/multisync-devel
