Hi André, Note: I CC'ed our -devel list and Francis.
On 03/19/2012 04:53 PM, André Walker wrote: ... > So, looking for other Perl projects in GSoC, I have found PacketFence. I > never really used it, but your "Ideas" page said it wasn't necessary. > Also, I have experience with PHP, and with Perl/Catalyst, so I was > interested in this idea: "Web administration interface rewrite". > > Can you tell me more about it? Yes, certainly! > It seems there are lots of PHP files, so > it doesn't look like a very small project. Though not hard either. But > that's just a first impression. The goal is not to re-do the whole thing but more to present a proof of concept of a subset of the Admin working in a modern Perl framework / architecture. We would like to push a portion of our logic code out of bin/pfcmd into a module that could be queried through Web Services *and* command line. Then have a modern admin interface that would consume the Web Services to offer the admin functionality. We considered Catalyst but our target platform (CentOS 5) doesn't seem to support it well. We try to stick to RPM packages at all costs so this is an additional constraint here. At this point, we were thinking about experimenting internally with Dancer, Mojolicious and another I can't remember now. High-level shopping list: * fully i18n, utf8 from start * templatable * testable * ajaxified interface (field validation, search operations) * flexible authentication to it (at least ldap, flat-file and possibility for more) * granular, per-action access control, grouped into configurable roles * good error handling, integrated into Log4perl * mobile version? * can run in a separate daemon than our captive-portal System contraints: * Must run on CentOS 5 (perl 5.8) * Must be packaged upstream (CentOS, rpmforge, EPEL) or easy to package Out of scope: * making it pretty * AJAX (unless there's time) As you can guess, we are basing some of our future on this rewrite of a core component so there will be plenty of coaching from multiple members of the team here at Inverse. > > It should be noted, I have no experience with SOAP::Lite currently, but > I'd be willing to learn before coding starts. Actually we are heading towards JSON instead right now so no SOAP::Lite is ok. > > If there's room for suggestions, if PHP is going to be dropped for > PacketFence, why not drop Apache as well? Starman would do a much better > job with Catalyst, for instance. This is exactly the kind of things we would like to try as part of a proof of concept! And having an experienced student in that area would be invaluable for our project (we are mostly hardcore network people). Cheers! -- Olivier Bilodeau obilod...@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 *115 :: www.inverse.ca Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ Packetfence-devel mailing list Packetfence-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-devel
