From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4c45f1bad914a439cfb32234f26c1513@quintile.net>
From: "Steve Simon" <steve@quintile.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:05:16 +0000
To: 9fans@9fans.net
In-Reply-To: <6A0064D3-2A14-4BB5-8D27-A487E3CAC120@mac.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] abaco @ plan9port [WAS: Hi and,
	plan9-native abaco sources?]
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 768f4af6-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> I think abaco should be made to host its own webcookies/webfs. Why
> not?

I think this is a bad idea, what if you want to use an alternate
webfs (on a different NIC), or an non-standard cookies file? do you
want to wait whilst webcookies rescans it databse at startup and
webfs rescans its cache (work in progress)?

If we continue this way why not put the code for webfs and and webcookies
in abaco, and why not include upas and nntpfs too; I guess you can see where
this is leading...

I think fgb's simple shell script is an elegant solution, if this is what
you want (sh to rc translation not withstanding) but keeping webfs and webcookies
as long lived external servers has significant benefits - it is The plan9 way™
after all.

-Steve