[ldm-users] Windows and LDM replacement

[Gerry Creager]

So what happens if we consider changing the protocol and wrap the files 
in said "new" protocol?  Then clients can be developed in Java, perl, 
pythn, c++, c#, FORTRAN, etc., for the OS of choice?

There's no reason why a client has to be coded in one language and run 
across all platforms...

gerry

Robert P Dale wrote:
> It seems to me we're jumping to the conclusion that LDM2 is intended only on
> Windows and that it will be Java... If there's a way to have it function on
> Linux & Windows, without being Java, I see no reason anyone would object?
> 
>  - Rob
> 
> ===
> From: Robert Mullenax [mailto:Robert.Mullenax at csbf.nasa.gov] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 4:41 PM
> To: Robert P Dale; ldm-users at unidata.ucar.edu
> Subject: RE: [ldm-users] Windows and LDM replacement
> 
> I also think IDV is better under Windows than Solaris or Linux..and I will
> conceed Windows has good points.  However the data ingest is the backbone of
> one's whole operations...and like you say Java is ust not worth it.  Makes
> more sense to me for Unidata to insist on UNIX/Linux only platforms for that
> portion and then as Dan suggested maybe offer some help to those new to UNIX
> or Linux.  It's not like an LDM-type only box needs that much attention.  I
> never touch our PDI NOAAport boxes at all.  I would touch my other LDM boxes
> if they weren't doing so many other things. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ldm-users mailing list
> ldm-users at unidata.ucar.edu
> For list information or to unsubscribe,  visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/ 

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.862.3982 FAX: 979.862.3983
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843