On Thursday 10 February 2011 11:08:53 Thomas Goettlicher wrote: > On Thursday, February 10, 2011 08:58:48 am Jiri Srain wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 February 2011 22:56:45 Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote: > > > On 02/09/2011 03:05 PM, Martin Vidner wrote: > > > > Take the existing unfinished attempts yast2-ruby-bindings, > > > > > > > > yast2-libyui, ruby-yui, bind libstorage to ruby. > > > > > > > > - loudly state the intent to make them usable, including a timeline > > > > (see When) - provide good and up-to-date documentation > > > > - integrate with the Ruby ecosystem: > > > > -- document in form usual for Ruby developers (rdoc/yard) > > > > -- get found at rubygems (if only as a stub to point to the real > > > > package) - move from Subversion to Git (host at Gitorious, Github, or > > > > both) (see Why Git) - give good examples of usage, by converting a > > > > couple of production > > > > > > > > YaST modules to the new platform > > > > > > Hey Martin, this is a great start. > > > > > > While I have to admit I am biased because I love ruby, There are other > > > reasons: > > > > > > - We have done already a lot of ruby investments in the team. > > > - Rails is great to have. WebYaST > > > > > > The plan looks great. Just some comments: > > > > > > - May be separate the ruby/UI part from the ruby/YCP bridges, that is, > > > not access the UI using YCP but direct ruby bindings. Rethink how this > > > API is exposed to the language. > > > - Migrate/Document current use cases (y2log, y2doc, y2tools) with > > > native ruby equivalents > > > - Look at what will replace SCR. Look at COMAR. Good stuff. > > > > I'd target higher here: D-Bus based interface can be only local, for > > WebYaST we have the REST API on top of D-Bus anyway, so why not use it? > > Using desktop YaST for managing machines remotely could be a nice bonus > > for rather low price (meaning added to what you plan to invest), you > > would not have to have the UI libraries installed on each system. > > I think there should be a common library for system access (e.g. COMAR). > Both webyast backend and desktop yast link against it. Dunno if dbus is > appropriate here. Doesn't every layer slow down interaction.
I'm not sure either. We need an interface because of two reasons: - have only the back-end runing as root - provide network transparency (to have the client - e.g. yastwc - run remotely) That was why I mentioned the REST API as a better solution. Regarding Klaus' comment from other reply on this email: I fully agree, we should definitely target more high level than what we have now. Jiri -- Regards, Jiri Srain YaST Team Leader --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: [email protected] Lihovarska 1060/12 tel: +420 284 084 659 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 084 001 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
