Re: [GNUnet-developers] OS-independent GUI, poor client-server messages

[hwkks]

Christian Grothoff wrote:

> On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 2:39 am, hwkks wrote:
>  
>
> > Hi list,
> > I just thought about writing an OS-independent GUI in Java (yes, I know,
> > Java sucks), but then I saw that the client-server messages are very poor.
> >
> >    * RETURN_VALUE
> >    * GET_STATISTICS
> >    * STATISTICS
> >    * TRAFFIC_QUERY
> >    * TRAFFIC_INFO
> >    * SHUTDOWN_REQUEST
> >    * GET_OPTION_REQUEST
> >    * GET_OPTION_REPLY
> >
> > There seems to be no way to search, to download or to view current
> > downloads. Are you planning to implement this soon?
> >    
>
> Well, how do you think the current clients work? :-).  As Nils already said, 
> you missed half the message definitions.  Anyway, you may not want to deal 
> with this low-level messaging anyway.  The GNUnet client (and in particular 
> the libesed2 library) have to do a lot more than just issue a single 'search' 
> or 'download' query.  But as Nils also mentioned, there is freeway.  Freeway 
> (re)implements (most of) libesed2 in Java, from message handling to the GUI. 
> I would suggest that you look into the freeway code.
>
>  
Ok, sorry, I see I was too fast. I thought it would be like mldonkey and 
sancho(a GUI). The core does all the work and the GUI is only for 
viewing  and simple operating. I should have read the docu more 
carefully, sorry about that.
But what I really wanted to build is a GUI like Sancho. If I understand 
it right the client has to run as long as you download a file. In a case 
where the core runs on a router without a display and the client works 
on another PC this would not be optimal. In this case it would be better 
if the core and client work on the router while I interact with the 
client from a GUI on my win32 system. So I can close the GUI and 
shutdown my system while gnunet still downloads my files on the router.
But I guess you don't plan to implement this into the client, or?

Timo