On Mar 30, 2017, at 09:45 PM, Jan Jancar wrote:
>This would also go well with an idea I had about the current state of
>the REST API and encrypted lists. With having decorators like
>"@exported_REST", another one could get introduced, something like
>"@requires_permission("some.perm.name")" which
On Mar 31, 2017, at 03:01 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>That sounds cool, but I tend to feel that WADL gets pretty heavy. If
>we can't just mark things with something like "@exported_REST", it's
>not clear that the maintenance burden is worth it.
Agreed, but note this is only one half of the e
On 03/30/2017 08:01 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Barry Warsaw writes:
>
> > up on the state of the art, but IIRC, there were Python libraries that
> could
> > generate bindings based on WADL.
>
> That sounds cool, but I tend to feel that WADL gets pretty heavy. If
> we can't just mark th
Barry Warsaw writes:
> up on the state of the art, but IIRC, there were Python libraries that could
> generate bindings based on WADL.
That sounds cool, but I tend to feel that WADL gets pretty heavy. If
we can't just mark things with something like "@exported_REST", it's
not clear that the ma
On Mar 30, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>Would you recommend against even exploring for a lightweight approach
>for some reason? Ie, the idea is bad according to some principle?
To the contrary, I think if it were possible it would be pretty nice. In
fact, you could conceivably
