On Apr 26, 4:12 pm, lkcl <luke.leigh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > and, given that you can use AJAX (e.g. JSONRPC) to communicate with a > server-side component, installed on 127.0.0.1 and effectively do the > exact same thing, nobody bothers.
I suppose, but again, that pushes off the security thing. There are a lot of obvious ways to make unintended security holes in a 127.0.0.1 application, so I'm sure there are also a lot of ways that would be unobvious to this security non-expert. And, of course, the real dealbreaker is, it still requires a separate install. > > That's understood (and a great thing). But if programmers could usepyjamas > > in the browser without an extra download to get to all the > > desktop features (which is how it *appears* to most users when they > > use flash or something like that), > > no - it's not going to happen: it's _required_ to install the flash > plugin. Yeah, but *everybody knows* you have to have the flash plugin. It's a given. Even if you write an exciting new flash app, probably only 0.01% of your userbase will need to install flash; everybody else will already have it installed. > > Alternatively, a single small download of a broswer add-on package to > > bring pyjamas desktop features into the browser (maybe even just for > > mozilla for now) would be awesome, as well. > > on debian/testing: "apt-get install hulahop python-xpcom" - actually > you just do "apt-get install pyjamas-desktop" because hulahop, python- > xpcom are dependencies and xulrunner is a sub-dependency. > > on win32: it's an additional 350k install: python "comtypes". that's > _it_ - that's all - and you're done: everything else is already there > (MSHTML.DLL is the key but you need the MSXML dll as well, but, duhh, > those come pre-installed with the OS, duhh) > > otherwise, you'd need that whopping 10mb python-inside-a-plugin, and > i'd need to port pyjd to it. loovely. i look forward to receiving > sponsorship to do that (probably about 2 weeks work: it's not rocket > science, now that there's 4 pyjd ports). I really appreciate your thoughts and these suggestions. But if you could extend "look, here's this awesome asteroids game, and you don't have to install anything!" to "look, here's this <arbitrary business app> and it stores all its data on your local machine, and you don't have to install anything!" that would be effing awesome. Next best would be the python-in-a-plugin. I think if someone steps up to the plate and supports your development of that, it would make a great delivery mechanism for programs. Best regards, Pat -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
