Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[stanislav.l]

?


I must say that my machine with Linux (where I run aMule) doesn't have any C: or N: discs
Yes, I have this discs on my MustDie machine ("no copirighted materials"!:) ) where I run amulegui & where I have made this screenshot, but it's strange to see them here ...

[stefanero]

well some things dont work as expected in the remote-gui
its still experimental you know
lfroen has coded the php-webserver lately, so no time for remote-gui improvements

[Kry]

Well ahem, shared folders does not work on EC yet. But we shouldn't show the local ones, wither  :]

[stanislav.l]

Originally posted by stefanero
well some things dont work as expected in the remote-gui
its still experimental you know

I wanted to write to "feature request" ...
(1-st: sorry for my english, 2-nd: sorry for this idea )

I think that it would be better to remake all  (sorry 4 times:) ) : "functional" part and user interface separately from the beginning, no "monolit" at all.

"feature" that I want : I have started amule, but later I need to close my screen session. But I don't want to stop amule. So, I want a button "go to background", which means - stop user interface, but leave amuled running! It's impossible with "monolit"

Today I need to use "monolit" because amuleweb does not give me full access to configuration pannel, and I can't use amuled+amulegui because of the bugs of amulegui

[lfroen]

stanislav: amuled is already full-featured. There're several features, that by defnition are either impossible or very hard to implement remotely.
One of them is setting shared/incoming/whatever directory. When connected from remote machine you have no idea how the path looks on machine where amuled runs. That would require remote browsing for directory.

amuleweb does not give me full access to configuration pannel

Only categories and paths missing. And on amulegui you can change categories too

[stanislav.l]

Originally posted by lfroen
There're several features, that by defnition are either impossible or very hard to implement remotely.
One of them is setting shared/incoming/whatever directory. When connected from remote machine you have no idea how the path looks on machine where amuled runs.

Sorry, I don't understand... Where is the problem? Remote user interface work stupidly with strings, generated by "server" and doesn't take care of it's origin... I'd say that "configuration" is the easyest part of the r.u.i. !

amuleweb does not give me full access to configuration pannel

Only categories and paths missing.

"Only" ?!

And on amulegui you can change categories too

It's evident that amulegui is (... ok, WAS!) a "truncated version" of amule ; in consequense of it, some values are duplicated... I can't say exactly at this moment, I've forgot, but you can verify: 1) Start amuled+amulegui 2) Change all the values in the "configuration" 3) Stop amuled+amulegui , start amule 4) Compare and enjoy ...

It can work correctly only if it was designed as "client+server" , separate it "on the fly" is a bad way ... IMHO !

[lfroen]

Sorry, I don't understand... Where is the problem?

As you stated, the problem is that you don't understand.

I'd say that "configuration" is the easyest part of the r.u.i. !

Reading comprehention is great ability. I'd suggest you to develop it.

I've forgot, but you can verify

And I will and fix if nessesary.

amulegui is (... ok, WAS!)

Something happened to amulegui ? I can't believe...

It can work correctly only if it was designed as "client+server" , separate it "on the fly" is a bad way

Oh, really ? Here is news for  you: amule is single user desktop application.What makes you think that it should be "designed client-server" ? There's long list of features that can not by definition work correctly on remote gui because this gui is remote. And you can assume nothing about bandwidth or latency of network connecting between core and gui. Core have huge datastructure (do you know ?) which is updated in real-time. If you have an idea about how to syncronize it better with remote - please, share this knowlage with me (no kidding).

[stanislav.l]

Oh, really ? Here is news for  you: amule is single user desktop application.What makes you think that it should be "designed client-server" ? There's long list of features that can not by definition work correctly on remote gui because this gui is remote. And you can assume nothing about bandwidth or latency of network connecting between core and gui. Core have huge datastructure (do you know ?) which is updated in real-time. If you have an idea about how to syncronize it better with remote - please, share this knowlage with me (no kidding).

It's only IMHO  :
For me, the greatest advantage of amule is its possibility to work as a daemon. You say "single user desktop application" ? Hmm.... I'd say, it's "NecroSoft's way" (I don't repeat "IMHO", all this text is "IMHO", you understand! ) I "was born" on IBM360, so all the fine pictures leave me indifferent. I don't know how to make "user interfaces" ... (My respect to all who knows)
I can imagine the problmes of working with your huge data structures in realtime. But :
1. Separating this application into "server" and "client" make the development  in general simplier - these 2 tasks are different, is it bad if the developer of the "user interface" does not depend on the developper of the "network part" ? (I don't forget about the problems of the interface between these 2 parts; but it's the only complication)
2. "Configuration" is a separate part of the "user interface" - others realtime requirements, insignificant size of structure, it can be even a separate program (althow it's not comfortable for user)

Aren't you agree? I stop writing, I don't want to impose my opinion ...

As to

I'd suggest you to develop it.

- I must reject with regret - my head does not accept "++" at all ... I tried several times  I can only give the adices

[lfroen]

Everything we say here is "IMO" since I don't recall that someone here represent more that himself/herself

it's "NecroSoft's way"

You wanna flamewar ? Slashdot is down the hall, first door on the right.

I "was born" on IBM360, so all the fine pictures leave me indifferent

More power to you, really.

I can imagine the problmes ... But :

my head does not accept "++" at all

How many client-server programs you personally wrote ? I guess none (unless you managed to write program without "++"). So please stop giving "looking from above" kind advices.

Aren't you agree?

With what ?! And what difference does it make ?
There's no reason to re-write amule in whatever way: it works good enough even now, given all shortcomings. Yes, remote gui must be improved.
You want point to me to specific bugs - you welcomed.

[Kry]

Originally posted by stanislav.l
I can imagine the problmes of working with your huge data structures in realtime.

No, you obviusly can't

Originally posted by stanislav.l
But :
1. Separating this application into "server" and "client" make the development  in general simplier - these 2 tasks are different, is it bad if the developer of the "user interface" does not depend on the developper of the "network part" ? (I don't forget about the problems of the interface between these 2 parts; but it's the only complication)

The "only" complication? What's the daemon without a UI? What's the GUI without a daemon? Nothing. So the interface between them is the MOST IMPORTANT THING. And right now, no developer depends on another (well, except conflict about working on the same part of the code - sright now I won't touch SearchList i.e. till Xaignar is finished with it, but meanwhile I'll do other stuff. There's no real problem for us.

Du you realize we already have  core and GUI splitted? What's the point in your claim? that we did it on the fly? Kudos to us. Most people said it was impossible to do it on the fly.

Originally posted by stanislav.l
2. "Configuration" is a separate part of the "user interface" - others realtime requirements, insignificant size of structure, it can be even a separate program (althow it's not comfortable for user)

I sugest going to your unix box, typing "sudo find -L / -type d | wc -c" And tell me again about "insignificant size of structure".

[skolnick]

Hmm...I can understand more or less both points in this thread (Honestly, I see better the devs POV), but I think the folder part can be fixed somehow in the FTP way? I mean, FTP protocol transfers the folders in the server, no matter which platform the client runs on, maybe amule can do the same. It would give a great feature available remotely, and the overhead in network usage would be small IMO. Last, but not least if my opinion sounds stupid...do not flame me, simply correct me in a good way, I'm good at learning

Regards.

[Kry]

Of course it can be done. It's just not done yet.