[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: HTTPAPI vs ISockets
I am finishing up my third project that I have used HTTPAPI for and it
has worked like a champ. It seems as though Cozzi has just gotten
weird these days. Thanks for HTTPAPI Scott.
> From: ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: ftpapi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: HTTPAPI vs ISockets
> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:57:39 +0000
>
> I have worked with Scott since late 2003 on the HTTPAPI project and
> during that time Scott has responded to my many queries and problems
> with speedy comments and resolutions. There is absolutly no doubt
that
> the support I have received over the years from Scott has been first
> class, and a damned sight better than most 'commercial' products.
>
> Regards
>
> Ian Patterson
>
> Grange IT Limited
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ftpapi-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ftpapi-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott
> Klement
> Sent: 20 November 2008 10:59
> To: HTTPAPI and FTPAPI Projects
> Subject: Re: HTTPAPI vs ISockets
>
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thank you for your kind words. I'd like to give my feelings on what
> Cozzi said, if that's okay...
>
> I wrote HTTPAPI largely for myself and one other developer to use. I
> didn't really design/write it with the goal of it being a publicly
> available software product. I later thought to myself "hey, it's
useful
> ... maybe others would like a copy" so I put an open source license
on
>
> it and put it on my web site.
>
> My attitude was "if this is useful, feel free to take it." I kinda
> thought that was a nice thing to do.
>
> Apparently not. Apparently if I want to give away source code, I'm
being
>
> downright rude, unless I offer to provide full support to the world
on
> my own time, for free.
>
> Incidentally, for the most part, I actually *do* provide full
support
> for free. I just don't make any promises that I will always be there
to
>
> do that.
>
> The library issue that Cozzi complains about is an example. As soon
as
> someone told me that it'd be better to remove the hard-coded
libraries,
> I did. Note that Cozzi never even mentioned the library issue to me.
He
>
> never gave me the option to fix it for him -- he, apparently, just
> decided that I'd take the 'you've got the source, fix it yourself'
> stance -- but since he didn't ask me (he didn't even tell me he
> downloaded HTTPAPI until much later) I'm not sure how I could've
taken
> that attitude with him.
>
> Indeed, I was speaking on HTTPAPI at RPG World. At the time, Cozzi
ran
> that conference in a partnership with Jon Paris and Susan Gantner.
> (Today that's no longer true, it's purely Cozzi's conference. The
group
> decided they didn't want to work together anymore.) I developed this
> session and gave it at this conference. By the time the next RPG
World
> came around, Cozzi told me that my session wouldn't be needed
anymore,
> since he had his own.
>
> The library problem was true. Sort of. I originally had LIBHTTP
> hard-coded into the system. If you wanted to use a different
library,
> you'd have to do a PDM option 25 and search out the 'LIBHTTP' string
and
>
> replace it with whatever you wanted to use. (Or do the same thing
with
> the FNDSTRPDM command.)
>
> I'm not sure how Cozzi came to the conclusion that searching for a
> string and replacing it was more work than writing his own tool from
the
>
> ground up. And I'm not sure why, if he felt so strongly about it, he
> couldn't do the FNDSTRPDM, replace it with a variable instead of a
> hard-coded reference, and contribute that back to the project.
Surely
> that would've been easier than writing his own tool from the ground
up?
>
> But, he didn't even mention it to me. Didn't even provide me with
> feedback telling me what he disliked about the project. Made no
effort
> at all to improve it.
>
> Nowadays, of course, you can specify any library that you like, or
> *LIBL, when you install HTTPAPI. The install program for HTTPAPI
asks
> you what you want to do, and gives you as much freedom as it can.
That
> happened because someone else (not Cozzi) mentioned to me that it'd
be
> nice to have. It took me about an an hour to change it and release
it
> to the public.
>
> I can only conjecture that there was another reason why he wanted to
do
> this. If he contributed to HTTPAPI, and improved it, it'd still be
my
> tool, right? It'd still have my name on it, and I'd still be
credited
> for it. My impression of Bob is that having credit for the work
would
> be very important to him.
>
> You'll note that iSockets isn't free, either. Not free as in
freedom,
> at any rate. He'll give you the compiled objects for free, but if
you
> want the source, it costs money, and it remains his property.
HTTPAPI is
>
> free as in freedom, as well as free of charge.
>
> The other thing that's always bugged me about iSockets is the
confused
> terminology. iSockets is a tool to simplify creating TCP
connections.
> It doesn't support all of the things that sockets can do, only what
TCP
> can do. It's touted all over as an HTTP tool, but it doesn't do HTTP
--
>
> you have to do that yourself. In his discussion of "what iSockets
can
> do" on the iSockets web site, it points you to a web page dedicated
to
> the HTTP protocol, even though his tool doesn't implement HTTP, it
> leaves it up to you to implement it (which is perhaps why you need
to go
>
> to that site) But, he never even mentions that you could use
iSockets
> to write other apps like e-mail, telnet, FTP, or the hundreds of
other
> tools that run over TCP. I've always wondered if he thinks sockets
are
> purely for HTTP, and doesn't realize that they're used for all
internet
> applications? He has a similar confusion about a URL vs. a host
name.
> His routine called OpenURL doesn't actually open an URL! It
establishes
>
> a TCP connection to a host name. To implement the other parts of the
> URL (the protocol, directory name and file name, for starters) you
have
> to write your own code.
>
> He also refers to it as a "free web services library". It's not a
web
> services library. It doesn't understand SOAP or WSDL or anything
like
> that. It doesn't even understand HTTP -- you have to code the HTTP
> yourself. Could you use iSockets to write a web services client?
Sure.
>
> But it'd be YOU writing the web services tool, and using iSockets as
a
>
> piece of it. It isn't, by itself, a web services tool.
>
> But, anyway... what am I quibbling for? If he uses his name (he's a
> bigger name than I am) and the fact that his software is sort-of
free,
> and other stories to compete with me, and take away all of my
> "customers", what does it hurt me? I don't make money on this.
>
>
>
> Jones, Simon wrote:
>
> > "Heck, look at iSockets (www.isockets.net) it is a SOCKETS wrapper
> > *SRVPGM that I wrote a couple years ago. Why did I write it?
Because
> > the one that "everybody" suggested I use, written by a noted
Magazine
> > Author, was so ridge that I couldn't install it into anything
other
> > than the library the author initially used. Which meant I had to
add
> > yet another library to my library list to, compile it, to run it
and
> > to allow the end-users to use it. The attitude of "you've got the
> > source, and it was free so change it yourself" is sort of strange
and
> > only dampens the desire for others to use it. And this one was
> > written by a relatively good developer."
> >
> > At least he thinks Scott is a 'relatively' good developer,
although
> > quite what you need to do to be an 'actually' good developer is
> beyond
> > me at the moment!
> >
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> This is the FTPAPI mailing list. To unsubscribe, please go to:
> http://www.scottklement.com/mailman/listinfo/ftpapi
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> This is the FTPAPI mailing list. To unsubscribe, please go to:
> http://www.scottklement.com/mailman/listinfo/ftpapi
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster. [1]Sign up today.
References
1. http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_faster_112008
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the FTPAPI mailing list. To unsubscribe, please go to:
http://www.scottklement.com/mailman/listinfo/ftpapi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------