Writing/porting web stuff to plan 9 will be hard. Writing something that
accesses plan 9 from the web will be less hard.
On May 17, 2011 6:53 PM, "errno" <errno@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 10:31:32 AM John Floren wrote:
>> they want to let you connect to your Plan 9 system from a web
>> browser, because you can find a Javascript-supporting web browser
>> anywhere (except Plan 9) these days.
>>
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 12:00:15 AM Adrian Tritschler wrote:
>> Serve it over http and access your CPU server from anywhere
>> that's got a web browser.
>>
>
> Is it really all that often when a Plan 9 user is in the precarious
> situation of needing to access his plan9 system from some
> other person's/party's pc or laptop?
>
> Is this for when you glide into a coffee shop and forget your
> laptop or something? "Hey, Mr.... may I borrow your laptop's
> web browser for a sec... I really need to hack some code on
> my plan9 system."
>
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 12:04:02 PM Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>> that's not the point though; the point is to have something
>> that runs natively in the browser.
>>
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 10:31:32 AM John Floren wrote:
>> Writing a drawterm replacement in Javascript is not
>> going to "downgrade" Plan 9.
>>
>
> Ok, who slipped me the Cr@zy Pills? Just a couple weeks ago,
> javascript and web technologies were THE DEVIL INCARNATE...
> but suddenly, here's something we can all get behind...
> javascript + html5 + browsers and other web standards
> are now OK[tm]?
>
> So.... it's cool to have "the 9" running 'native' in a browser
> (via javascript!)... but to have "the web" running 'native' in
> Plan 9... is stark full of controversy, fear, uncertainty and
> doubt?
>
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:18:45 AM erik quanstrom wrote:
>> one would then be able to write applications for non-plan 9
>> users in plan 9.
>>
>
> I realize I'm being unimaginative, but I'm having a very difficult
> time conceiving what sort of plan 9 application could possibly
> be appealing to non-plan 9 users.
>
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:18:45 AM erik quanstrom wrote:
>> it would be nice to have emulated environment that's more
>> portable than 9vx and not tied to 32-bit x86.
>>
>
> Well now this at least actually makes some modicum of sense
> to me.
>
> The web is the key.
>