On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 23:40 +1200, Lee Begg wrote: > Hi > > I have developed tpserver-cpp so that it now dynamically loads rulesets, > persistence and tpscheme modules. The next step take the current modules out > of the tpserver-cpp tree and into their own.
I think this is a bad idea. Separating the modules for packaging is a good idea, IE tpserver-cpp-core_1.0.2-3_i386.deb tpserver-cpp-ruleset-minisec_1.0.2-3_i386.deb tpserver-cpp-tpscheme-mzscheme_1.0.2-3_i386.deb tpserver-cpp-tpscheme-guile_1.0.2-3_i386.deb tpserver-cpp-persistence-mysql_1.0.2-3_i386.deb The apt/yum/whatever will automagically get the recommended versions of the modules. However when building from source, downloading 4 separate packages is a bad annoying. Without the modules the server is pretty much useless. Without the server the modules are useless. They are clearly not separate entities and hence they should come together. Using a directory structure like tpserver-cpp/core tpserver-cpp/modules tpserver-cpp/modules/rulesets tpserver-cpp/modules/rulesets/minisec tpserver-cpp/modules/rulesets/mtsec tpserver-cpp/modules/tpscheme tpserver-cpp/modules/tpscheme/mzscheme tpserver-cpp/modules/tpscheme/guile tpserver-cpp/modules/persistence/mysql tpserver-cpp/modules/persistence/pgsql tpserver-cpp/modules/persistence/sqlite tpserver-cpp/modules/???? Would allow splitting out the modules at a later date. You already have something similar to that. One of the biggest criticism I have gotten is that there are too many modules, making more is not a good idea. > I want to check the naming suggestion for their repositories. I am currently > suggesting: > tpserver-cpp-<moduletype>-<modulename> > > For example: > tpserver-cpp-ruleset-minisec > tpserver-cpp-tpscheme-mzscheme > tpserver-cpp-tpscheme-guile > tpserver-cpp-persistence-mysql > > These would each be a darcs repo (and I can do it without losing any > history). > If anyone has a better name, then let me know. > > In other tpserver-cpp news, we now use libtprl for readline console support. > This should allow a better interface, but currently needs work. > > Future plans: > - Split modules out of tpserver-cpp tree > - MTSec ruleset > - Console improvements > - http tunnel socket > - fix wrong share dir for tpscheme impls > - better universe generation All these look pretty good (apart from the split bit). > Later > Lee Begg _______________________________________________ tp-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.thousandparsec.net/tp/mailman.php/listinfo/tp-devel
