[Pipet Devel] 3/1 and 1/3

[jarl van katwijk]

> > > About the architecture... what about this: Everything that's done locally
> > > (including running other exceutables) is handled by Overflow and all networking
> > > stuff would be handled by GMS, which would take care of connecting all Overflow
> > > processes (here I'm talking about "process" in a weak sense) through a network.
> > > This way there wouldn't be any duplication. Also, every node-to-node connection
> > > in the GMS part of the GUI would be assumed to be "network-able".
> >
> > This is EXACTLY what I was thinking of.  Brad and Jarl, is this not what you
> > guys were thinking?

We'll disable (do not use) the features that collide with this.

>
>
> I agree.  From the user's perspective, both GMS and Overflow behave
> alike; they should a common interface.  That way, the end user need not
> be aware of which 'engine' is behind the interface, which is the way is
> should be.

Yes, even the gui wont notice the diff., there will be one function 'upload()'
called on the BL ('gms') orb.