>rpd Hi, >and handled at server-side. Most browsers support this, so all >you need on client side is a webbrowser (even without java).
I have thought about using HTTP upload method too. I see two reasons, 1. it is compatible with web browsers, and 2. As a webservice, it should penentrate most firewalls. My motivations for the Lilypond Server is not only for public access but also for an easy bridge for LilypondTool to a coLinux machine. Possibles of disadvantages of HTTP upload method I think of is 1) Slower 2) File Size Limit 3) More java coding on the client side. However, it doesnt mean I against the web-based LilyPond. For now I think that lets say you are on windows, you only need a LilyTool for jEdit, (with has all the wizards and synatax colouring), it will be simple for you to use Lilypond. Lets say on a Linux machine which have problems installing Lilypond, perphaps a small python client script could be ran like "python LilyPondClient.py foo.ly". Of course, if you can come up with php for Lilypond, I would like to change like LilyTool to implement the HTTP upload method. But I wonder how you will implement the php? Will you call the Lilypond process stright from php [proc_open()]? or would you open a socket to connect to a Lilypond Server [fopen() or socket_create()] For a ASCII representation Key: L=Lilypond, S=Lilypond Server, M= Lilypond Server & Manager, P=PHP Webby, W=Webpage User, T=LilyTool user # Scenario 1 L <-- S --> M <-- P <-- W L <-- S -/ \-- T Here, the Manager itself could be a Lilypond Server, but also could delicate jobs to other Lilypond Servers and acting like a relay or proxy. Clients could connect to this manager and webbase users use the webpage which uses the manager. # Scenario 2 L <--------\ L <-- S <-- P <-- W L <-- S <-/ \-- T This case, the php webbie acts as a lilypond server (and manager for clustering). Anyway, these are what I have in mind, I not a good programmer or designer, so this mostly have flaws. >This way or the other, the main question is: Who is willing to provide >bandwith for (at least) a proof-of-concept site? I consider this a superb >way to demonstrate for many people what can be done with LilyPond. Or, do you mean a test machine as well? My school gave me a P2 300mhz pc, 64Mb, but its harddisk is not working and cd-rom does not boot up. I might try to fixing it and setting it up as a POC, and also if my upload speed of 10KBytes/s at home wont be too much of a disappointment. >On the security: the server could be on a unix system, where php/lilypond >user doesn't have read access to the whole directory tree, but it is kept >restricted in a dedicated place. Doesn't it eliminates the security danger >Berti mentioned? Could somebody explain me please, where I am missing the >obvious? I think its mentioned before there's the danger of having scheme code, like "rm -rf /". Of course, i think it wouldnt be a problem if a Server is used just to bridge from the coLinux guest to host machine, but it would be a trouble on the public access server. If the server is not run as root, will the scheme run codes as sudo or root? If there's really a need, then lilypond might have to be jailed and put in a straight-jacket (meaning the shell and safe mode ;p) >Ps. Joshua, all those ideas about putting computing power behind the service >are fantastic. Let's make it let's make it ;-) Thanks for your comments, but I think I not capable in lots of stuff like programming or using linux so I think I would have much to learn :) Joshua
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
