On 24.08.2009 13:58 Uhr, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
You can still use one interface though - MI is fully available and does (pseudo) async xmlrpc commands.
that is not true if you use modules from both s and k (like domain domain module, for example, that is much more advanced in s).
ok, I see. Solutions: - stress Andrei and/or other RPC devels :-) - add missing/needed MI commands to s modules
I am considering merging sl module -- seems to be one preventing using easy some modules from both sides.
besides, s xmlrpc interface is much better that k's, because it each call executes a config file route block, that allows (among other things) access control.
With this one I agree.
Cheers, Daniel