Keith Devens .com
Keith Devens .com |
Friday, October 10, 2008 | |
| Make the most of your regrets; never smother your sorrow, but tend and cherish it till it comes to have... – Henry David Thoreau | ||
|
| ← Perl Contains the Lambda-Calculus | Steve Dekorte on Taxes → |
asdf wrote:
Keith (http://keithdevens.com/) wrote:
How is FTP/WebDAV awkward? You put in your login information and you're done.
REST would be great.
Why, so I have to write a program on the server side to process it?
asdf wrote:
Have you ever used WebDAV? I have it on good authority that it's a god-awful mess.
Why, so I have to write a program on the server side to process it?
Uh, no.
HTTP is far far more common than FTP. And I don't know anybody that really used WebDAV. Makes perfect practical sense to make the synchronizer work over HTTP. Or would you rather have it synchronize via a more archaic means - like the old !bang protocol or maybe even gopher?
Keith (http://keithdevens.com/) wrote:
> Why, so I have to write a program on the server side to process it?
Uh, no.
HTTP is far far more common than FTP... Makes perfect practical sense to make the synchronizer work over HTTP. Or would you rather have it synchronize via a more archaic means - like the old !bang protocol or maybe even gopher?
To upload a file to your website? WTF are you talking about?
What could be easier than this?
And by the way, the HTTP settings are WebDAV. If you still think it should use a REST API, then tell me how that would work.
asdf wrote:
You've never heard of transferring data via HTTP? Store it in a file, database, ... 
Keith (http://keithdevens.com/) wrote:
You mean, and run a program on the server side to process it??
Justin wrote:
Why not just specify the same bookmark file for both installs?
browser.bookmarks.file in about:config will do it.
Keith (http://keithdevens.com/) wrote:
Because my Linux and Windows installs are on separate drives, and each drive's filesystem is mutually incompatible with the other (ReiserFS vs. NTFS[1]). But, if I store my data on a drive with FAT32, which both can read reliably, then I can do it. That's exactly what I was talking about doing above.
Footnotes:
[1]: yes, I know you can mount NTFS drives in Linux (and I do), but they say it's not stable enough to write reliably, so I don't touch it
asdf wrote:
You mean, and run a program on the server side to process it??
And WebDAV doesn't do that (and is far more complicated to set up)?
BTW, that dialog window image is overlaying the comments and obscuring them.
Keith (http://keithdevens.com/) wrote:
If you don't like WebDAV, use FTP. But you're not advocating that, you're advocating a REST-style service, I know not why.
BTW, that dialog window image is overlaying the comments and obscuring them.
What browser? Looks fine to me in Firefox and IE. Note that the screenshot has a bit of my home page around the edges, and maybe that's what you're talking about.
asdf wrote:
I don't like FTP either. I keep it disabled and only use sftp.
I'm using Firefox 1.0.2.
asdf wrote:
Note that the screenshot has a bit of my home page around the edges, and maybe that's what you're talking about.
Ah, that's what it is. Nevermind.
trejkaz (http://trypticon.org) wrote:
WebDAV seems to be REST anyway, since it's just new actions to perform on the same resource/URL.
Feel free to post a comment below. Please see my comment policy.
Formatting Rules (No HTML):
Generated in about 0.205s.
(Used 8 db queries)
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Permalink
FTP/WebDAV? Geez, that's awkward. REST would be great.