[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
   > 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
   > ... maybe others would like a copy" so I put an open source license
   > 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
   > downright rude, unless I offer to provide full support to the world
   > my own time, for free.
   > Incidentally, for the most part, I actually *do* provide full
   > for free. I just don't make any promises that I will always be there
   > do that.
   > The library issue that Cozzi complains about is an example. As soon
   > someone told me that it'd be better to remove the hard-coded
   > I did. Note that Cozzi never even mentioned the library issue to me.
   > 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
   > that attitude with him.
   > Indeed, I was speaking on HTTPAPI at RPG World. At the time, Cozzi
   > that conference in a partnership with Jon Paris and Susan Gantner.
   > (Today that's no longer true, it's purely Cozzi's conference. The
   > 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
   > came around, Cozzi told me that my session wouldn't be needed
   > 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
   > you'd have to do a PDM option 25 and search out the 'LIBHTTP' string
   > replace it with whatever you wanted to use. (Or do the same thing
   > 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
   > 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.
   > that would've been easier than writing his own tool from the ground
   > 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
   > 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
   > you what you want to do, and gives you as much freedom as it can.
   > happened because someone else (not Cozzi) mentioned to me that it'd
   > nice to have. It took me about an an hour to change it and release
   > to the public.
   > I can only conjecture that there was another reason why he wanted to
   > this. If he contributed to HTTPAPI, and improved it, it'd still be
   > tool, right? It'd still have my name on it, and I'd still be
   > for it. My impression of Bob is that having credit for the work
   > be very important to him.
   > You'll note that iSockets isn't free, either. Not free as in
   > at any rate. He'll give you the compiled objects for free, but if
   > want the source, it costs money, and it remains his property.
   > free as in freedom, as well as free of charge.
   > The other thing that's always bugged me about iSockets is the
   > terminology. iSockets is a tool to simplify creating TCP
   > It doesn't support all of the things that sockets can do, only what
   > 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
   > do" on the iSockets web site, it points you to a web page dedicated
   > 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
   > to write other apps like e-mail, telnet, FTP, or the hundreds of
   > tools that run over TCP. I've always wondered if he thinks sockets
   > purely for HTTP, and doesn't realize that they're used for all
   > applications? He has a similar confusion about a URL vs. a host
   > His routine called OpenURL doesn't actually open an URL! It
   > 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
   > to write your own code.
   > He also refers to it as a "free web services library". It's not a
   > services library. It doesn't understand SOAP or WSDL or anything
   > that. It doesn't even understand HTTP -- you have to code the HTTP
   > yourself. Could you use iSockets to write a web services client?
   > But it'd be YOU writing the web services tool, and using iSockets as
   > 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
   > 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?
   > > the one that "everybody" suggested I use, written by a noted
   > > Author, was so ridge that I couldn't install it into anything
   > > than the library the author initially used. Which meant I had to
   > > yet another library to my library list to, compile it, to run it
   > > 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
   > > 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,
   > > 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.


   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: