Re: xPLLib v3.0 Public Beta

["John B" <home-automation@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Tom,

>
> Hi Ian,
>
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:27:07 -0000, Ian Lowe <ian@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
> <snip>
> > Like Mal, I'd rather see an absolutely Bulletproof tested and
solid hub
> > running as a windows service, rather than relying on various
> > implementations within apps.
>
> Maybe you've got a point here.  Would this configuration exist
anywhere:
> an xPL Hub (as service) + windows applications (not service) ?

Yes - it's quite possible.

> I did make the assumption that xPL apps using xPL Lib would be running
> as services, not as regular windows applications.

It really depends on the type of application.
If it's something like an interface to a CM12, then IMO it makes more sense
to have it as a service.
But if it's something like an xPL plug-in for Winamp, then it's only
running while Winamp is running.

> If a user has xpl windows applications and no xpl services then it is
> of course better to have a dedicated hub...  It seems rare to me.

Depends on how the user is using xPL.

For example, I have computers around the house that only have an xPL
desktop OSD app, and Winamp with it's xPL plug-in, so there are no xPL
services running on the machine.  In those cases, an xPL Hub service seems
the most reliable way to go.

> I suggest the following amendment:
> - give the developer the possibility to prohibit their app to be hub
> - advice developers to do so in case their app is not a service

Can I suggest the opposite :-)
I think xPLLib should not act as a hub unless the developer instructs it to
do so.

Apps like xPLHal can then decide whether to use the xPLLib hub based on the
user's configuration (configurable via the xPLHal Manager).

The end result is a common hub implementation (through xpllib) for any .NET
app that wants to include the ability to act as a hub, and we can even use
the same xPLLib library within the stand-alone .NET hub service.

The important thing (to me) is that the user retains control over which app
they want to act as their hub.
I know that on my xPLHal computer, it is xPLHal that is acting as the hub
(because I made sure the box was ticked in the Manager that said
"Enable xPL hub").
And on every other computer, it is the stand-alone hub service that is
providing the hub.

I do think that a stand-alone hub service written entirely in pure C++
(i.e. no need for .NET or any ActiveX DLLs) would be very useful as a
building block for an xPL installation, and should be more efficient than
anything that uses .NET or ActiveX.... are you offering Mal ;-)

Regards,

John