vikingtux at gmail.com
Sun Feb 4 00:21:37 EST 2007
I think Nitro should stay limited to Web stuff ... maybe it could be
extended to some ponctual non-web job but it is essentially a web framework.
On 2/3/07, Jonathan Buch <john at oxyliquit.de> wrote:
> > Is Nitro limited to Web stuff? Could I not have URIs with my own
> > protocol (e.g., jgb://some-stuff ) and teach Nitro to Do The Right
> > Thing when it sees it?
> > I think I tend to think of Web apps (or apps in general) as "fetch this
> > resource, do something with it, and pass it on." Often it involves
> > http:// , but not always.
> yes, I do think that Nitro is limited to Web stuff. At least at the
> moment. I'm not sure how hard it would be to write a 'adapter' like the
> CGI one, just for another type of 'getting called'. I don't think
> it would be particularily hard, but all the "mechanisms" within Nitro
> are of course quite 'web centered'.
> Somebody might prove me horribly wrong when I say this. :)
> Anyone have an idea of a protocol which would fit into the Nitro 'range'
> of working with things? I'd really be interested to hear one. :D
> (Nitro, going general purpose!)
> Feel the love
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Nitro-general