Control

[Pedro Larroy]

Hi

I think the control messages should follow the same message format we have for core. Does that make sense?

Pedro.

[Steven Jewel]

On 05/16/2014 02:35 AM, Pedro Larroy wrote:
> I think the control messages should follow the same message format we
> have for core. Does that make sense?

I don't think so. The control interface should be as simple as
possible. For example, if a PHP programmer wants to add clearskies
support into his website it should be really simple.

I suppose we could switch to a REST API over HTTP for control instead of
our own JSON-and-newlines approach. That'd be even simpler for GUIs and
integrators to implement.

Steven

[Pedro Larroy]

Does that mean we need to have a web server integrated on the core?  I think Detunized is also of this opinion.

I thought it would be easier to reuse the message encoding system....  but it's not much work to read the messages.

Steven


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClearSkies Dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clearskies-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Pedro Larroy Tovar   |    http://pedro.larroy.com/

[Steven Jewel]

On 05/16/2014 11:22 AM, Pedro Larroy wrote:
> Does that mean we need to have a web server integrated on the core? I
> think Detunized is also of this opinion.

Maybe the more appropriate way would be to integrate clearskies-core
into a webserver, for those that want it. Since clearskies-core is
easily embeddable into other apps (by design, since it's going to be
embedded into an android app and an iOS app), that would be easy to do.

This would be called clearskies-server or something and would be
appropriate for people that want to integrate clearskies into their website.

Steven

[Dmitry Yakimenko]

Even though it would be less work for us for now to add control messages using

the same  schema/encoding as network messages, in the long run it would be

better to have simpler more standardized protocol, like pure JSON rather than a

customized version of it.

We spoke with Pedro in person and he convinced me that it would be easier to

start with the existing schema. He also had a point regarding large control

messages, when they might need to be split up into chunks or zipped and it fits

better the network message format we already have.

On the other hand, pure JSON is much friendlier to the users, especially from

crippled platforms like JavaScript without proper binary support.

Dima.

On Friday, May 16, 2014 7:22:45 PM UTC+2, Pedro Larroy wrote:

Does that mean we need to have a web server integrated on the core?  I think Detunized is also of this opinion.

I thought it would be easier to reuse the message encoding system....  but it's not much work to read the messages.

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Steven Jewel <clear...@stevenjewel.com> wrote:

On 05/16/2014 02:35 AM, Pedro Larroy wrote:

I think the control messages should follow the same message format we
have for core. Does that make sense?

I don't think so.  The control interface should be as simple as possible.  For example, if a PHP programmer wants to add clearskies support into his website it should be really simple.

I suppose we could switch to a REST API over HTTP for control instead of our own JSON-and-newlines approach.  That'd be even simpler for GUIs and integrators to implement.

Steven


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClearSkies Dev" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clearskies-de...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.