[mnet-devel] MT return (was Re: releasing v0.6.2)

[rob kinninmont]

On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:06:58AM -0400, icepick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 12:28:32PM -0700, Jim McCoy wrote:
> > where do you want it located?
> 
> mnet_new/mnetlib/metatracker, please.  If it doesn't work with the 0.7 code
> I'll happly make it so.


On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:58:00PM -0400, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
>
> Allow me to clarify.  I do not advocate ripping the bars off the windows
> (changing Mnet v0.7 source to remove encryption from EGTP) because the door is
> standing open.
>
> I do advocate moving into a new house named "Chez Twisted" for v0.8, which
> comes with either unlocked windows (TCP) or heavyweight steel shutters (SSL),
> and not, at *this* point, bothering to add nice lightweight bars (EGTP) to the
> windows, because the door is standing open.

I'm sort of stumbling into this discussion in the middle, so I just thought I'd give a quick update on what I've just been doing.

Starting out with a goal of adding new and interesting services to the brokers (specifically hooks for getting centra services' basic functionality going again) I spent a while figuring out how to add a new service; delving into egtp and meta tracker stuff.

As for the meta tracker, I've been working with the old UD-derived code and fixing things as I needed to.  Along the way it became pretty obvious that working on that codebase on one hand and mnet on the other meant I was going to be dealing with two divergent versions of much of the code.  Hence I'd be interested in seeing the MT code brought forward to a state where it'll play nicely with the library (eg egtp) versions in mnet.

I'm not sure exactly what it'll take, but if folks are cool with it I'll go ahead and try and get it working, check it in etc., to mnet_new/mnetlib/metatracker.  It's functionality that I'd rather not see lost, though I appreciate it's a slightly different direction than most of mnet is heading.


As for EGTP I'll say I'm slightly worried by and slightly confused by the idea of dropping it.  From what I've seen it works pretty well, and now that I'm wrapping my head around it it seems pretty cool.  I guess I missed the discussion which motivated abandoning egtp, but for my $.02 I'd like to see it stick around.


As for moving to twisted, much of the code I've been writing so far has lived in a twisted (reactor) world rather than a mojo world.  One of my goals is to figure out how to get mnet and my other code to live happily together, so reworking the doq to be reactor based seemed like a good idea to me.  Is there a strong desire, or a good reason to, rework code to work with the reactor directly rather than wrapping the doq code around it?


As for branching and merging, I've been working in/using branch_metatracker_router and haven't been keeping tabs on the differences between that, newnet and head.  With the sounds of merging waffting this way, I'm curious as to whether anyone can give me a quick summary of the different branches, the directions they're heading and what the fate of branch_metatracker_router is.


Otherwise I hope everyone's doing well, and with the metaphor of moving house in the air, I've just literally moved house, and it's a time consuming process, with the end still not really in sight.

Cheers,
rob


--
rob kinninmont

"War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left."


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
mnet-devel mailing list
mnet-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mnet-devel