On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 07:02:46PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> So right now things are a-little messy with client apps.  Some talk to
> the node using Freenet's encrypted protocol, some use FCP, some
> are plugins for the node, and others use XML-RPC.
> 
> I think that some standardization is in-order.  The Whiterose approach
> is that the node itself speaks two protocols, the encrypted inter-node
> protocol, and FCP.  XML-RPC talks to the node via FCP, as does any
> command-line clients or HTTP proxy.  This is attractively simple.
> 
> Of course, it is, in some ways, desirable with a Java implementation to
> facilitate plugins, since it saves you the overhead of multiple VMs.
> One approach to this would be to have a plugin interface which expose
> methods to the plugin that map directly to FCP operations.  This saves
> the cost of a local TCP connection, and all of the parsing that goes on
> at both ends with FCP.  Ideally this interface would be the same as a
> Java FCP library that can be used by external programs (for
> consistency).

Read the list archives.








Hah ;)

Ok, I'll do anything for our favorite rock star..

Yes, Ian, there's already a simple plug-in API in 0.4 that allows the
plug-ins to use an internal implementation of the Client API in exactly
the same way as someone using the Client library to do FCP or FNP.

-- 

# tavin cole
#
# "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect,
#  a continual flight from wonder."
#                                   - Albert Einstein


_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to