On 13 Sep 2005, at 10:57, Paul Hussein wrote:
The clients that are built-in to tools, are another thing which I
know exists. My fault, I didnt make my falvour of client I would
like to see clear! I am looking for a client that integrates
directly with WindowsXXX seemlessly.
That takes you out of the land of java, and into the land of C; which
means picking a C dav backend like neon and using that to build an FS
client.
All well and good, but, IMO, very disconnected from where we are and
the work that Slide needs doing.
What is the 'Gnome/KDE DAV stuff' which you refer to ? Is that the
builtin filesystem stuff in the desktop or is there a specifics
client you are referring to ?
(asking linux guy next to me)
Konqueror, Nautilus, bluefish, etc. Konqueror can't do edit-in-
place, I'm being told, and so you have to use a dav client in
bluefish or something else.
As for more people getting involved, I think there is more than one
way to skin a cat. I think a good windows client would encourage
more people to use the server, and in turn bring more developers.
There's good, vs. pervasive. We went through that decision here when
determining how to support customers connecting to the service via
the slide integration we've done - and we ended up deciding that most
users would either want to use the built in web folders, with the
caveats documented, or choose to use something like Dreamweaver or
GoLive - and so on Windows, that's what we have to support.
For those who want to, going commercial for something like WebDrive
isn't an issue for us - we as a company don't want to be supporting a
client.
I agree at the moment the project seems to have few developers, and
slow release/fix cycle.
It's fine, so long as you're willing to run off of CVS, and run your
own tests for acceptability, and patch what needs patching as you
find the problems.
I just don't feel that's a 'big impact' release style, and if
anything's going to hold it back, that's what will hold it back - not
client pervasiveness, as clients are already pretty pervasive.
I agree - there's no good, all-singing, all-dancing client that I can
use to watch over my DAV service with. At this point in time,
though, I'm just not all that fussed about it; no doubt that the java
API would make a good one, but that's a far cry from providing a
Windows-integrated desktop solution for doing so.
Of course, I'm biased. I'm a mac guy, with a Linux guy on one side,
and a Windows guy on the other. If I were to need a solution for
that, I'd need one for all three of us.
Hence, we use davexplorer, regardless of its limitations. :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
