On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:36 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think this is a bad idea, what if you want to use an alternate > > webfs (on a different NIC), or an non-standard cookies file? do you > > want to wait whilst webcookies rescans it databse at startup and > > webfs rescans its cache (work in progress)? > > > > If we continue this way why not put the code for webfs and and webcookies > > in abaco, and why not include upas and nntpfs too; I guess you can see > where > > this is leading... > > > > I think fgb's simple shell script is an elegant solution, if this is what > > you want (sh to rc translation not withstanding) but keeping webfs and > webcookies > > as long lived external servers has significant benefits - it is The plan9 > way™ > > after all. > > standard slippery slope argument. > > i think that abaco (by inheratance from webfs) may confuse > elegance with unfriendliness. for example, why do i have > to type "http://";? why can't i type "g $query" to google > something? why doesn't esc in the tag highlight like acme? > > abaco is great stuff. this is why i took the time to add a few > of these things to my version. they might not be the height > of elegance. they may not be added in the right place. perhaps > webfs should do this. but usability is important, too. >
have you sent your patches to fgb? iru
