I think the best solution may be to make the toolserver's existing
support for Mono more widely known, and encourage our .NET gurus to take
a look. :) Mono should be source- and even binary- compatible with much
existing wiki-related .NET code, as long as it doesn't rely on stuff
like the IE WebBrowser control; most of AWB's WikiFunctions.dll seems to
function for example. The developers of AWB, Huggle, etc. might be able
to whip up some exciting stuff for the toolserver that builds on their
existing codebases.
-Krimpet
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 12:32 -0500, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
-----Original
Message-----
From: River Tarnell [mailto:river@wikimedia.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:22 PM
To: lar(a)miltontrainworks.com; toolserver-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Toolserver-l] Windows back on track?
Larry Pieniazek:
LP> River asked for technical only, I think.
LP> I see some people going down the "windows sucks" path... and some
LP> going down the "how do we license" path. Both seem
premature to me
LP> (valid for later)
yes, quite... any discussion of implementation is going to be
contentious. i was hoping to avoid that until there's
actually a clear need for it.
It is not clear there is a need yet... there may well not be. (if I were
betting, I'd bet that way, regardless of how nifty some client guis on .net
might be, they're not relevant)
But the tangents make it harder to tell. :)
Larry Pieniazek
Hobby mail: Lar at Miltontrainworks dot com
_______________________________________________
Toolserver-l mailing list
Toolserver-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l