Brad Chapman wrote: > > 1. Bindings: From what I figure, we should need C and python bindings > for the ORB we use. ORBit, of course, is all about C, and has python > bindings under development (but still quite early in development). > omniORB has really nice python bindings, but does not have C bindings > as far as I know, which is a serious problem. What is omniORB written in then? C++? > 3. Naming service: It seems like using the naming service might be a > good bet for maintaining a list of available VSH implmementations (I > think Jeff has described this before as a kind of domain name service > that maps vsh implementations to their names (ie. Jeff's computer)). And the actual nodes contained therein. We need a directory service of a sort. > Are there considerations we should be taking into account? My big concern is licensing. But I guess both are GNU L/GPL, right? > Are there other orb implementations we should be considering? Not that I know of. > Does anyone see a workaround for the threading and binding problems I > mention above? How can we reconcile this? Do we need, ugh, two > ORB implementations? Definitely not. Being partial to Gnome, and considering how much Gnome/Gtk is being used already, I'd prefer ORBit. Cheers. Jeff -- +----------------------------------+ | J.W. Bizzaro | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/~jeff/ | | | | BIOINFORMATICS.ORG | | The Open Lab | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/ | +----------------------------------+