sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Duane Malcolm <d.malcolm AT auckland.ac.nz>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:44:36 +1300
I have thought about this before.
You still need in the spell index:
- spell name and version
- description
- website
- dependencies
Because a user will still like to search, view the website of the spell and look at what dependencies are required while you are offline. So the question is do you really save much downloading. I like the idea of downloading changes only.
Duane
astsmtl AT gmail.com wrote:
I propose new sorcery model:
No more grimoire tarballs, scribe downloads indexes. Cast first checks these indexes, then downloads spell(s) and installs software.
Advantages:
Indexes are smaller, than full grimoire tarballs, thus it is possible to maintain many versions of one spell + version dependencies. Also, this model is ideal for sim's "web-interface sorcery".
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal
, (continued)
- Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal, Andrew, 01/28/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal, Eric Sandall, 01/28/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal, Adam Clark, 01/27/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal,
neuron, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal, Andrew, 01/27/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal,
Karsten Behrmann, 01/27/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] New sorcery model proposal, Jeremy Kolb, 01/27/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.