Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > Also considering remote execution, it's a nice thing to have, but it's not > something you're going to use all the time. You might not need remote execution for AI/robotics, but it is critical for computational biology. I think rather than some sort of homogenization of our projects, we'd be better off distinguishing application integration and application development. GMS/Loci can handle the first, and Overflow can handle the second. This is item 1) from before, which you said is trivial. But considering issues of authentication/security that Jarl brought up, issues of Internet-awareness that I brought up, and issues of speed/performance that you brought up, it may be an insurmountable task trying to get Overflow to do all of this. In any case, making Overflow's core 'the' core would leave very little left of the GMS project...and I think that's why Jarl is feeling a bit jilted. > As for the name, vsh (although it exists - but dead) would be nice... Besides > that, the reason we chose Overflow is that ObjectFlow, gFlow, VisualFlow, ... > were all taken. We could use... GNU VSH like 'New VSH'. Jeff -- +----------------------------------+ | J.W. Bizzaro | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/~jeff/ | | | | BIOINFORMATICS.ORG | | The Open Lab | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/ | +----------------------------------+