On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:58:48AM +0100, Jiri Srain wrote:
On Wednesday 09 February 2011 22:56:45 Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote:
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.
Yes
- Migrate/Document current use cases (y2log, y2doc, y2tools) with native ruby equivalents
Yes
- Look at what will replace SCR. Look at COMAR. Good stuff.
Right.
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.
It feels a bit too much, but I'll remember to consider it.
I have one concern about D-Bus, probably coming from lack of knowledge: SCR is able to run an instance in chroot, which is used during installation; while I can imagine any kind of web service run in chroot as well, can D-Bus handle this?
Not out of the box, but for the installation it is simple to reconfigure the daemon to listen on a socket visible from the chroot or on a localhost TCP socket. -- Martin Vidner, YaST developer http://en.opensuse.org/User:Mvidner Kuracke oddeleni v restauraci je jako fekalni oddeleni v bazenu