On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:59:38 +0200, Stefan Scholl <stesch@no-spoon.de> wrote:

Well, all your stuff starts with "0.". So I'd say this is more a Version 2.10 :-)

Hehe. That's a tough one. I think it's OK to start with "0." if you have a brand-new, untested package. So I usually start with 0.1.0 and increment that last number for minor changes and bug fixes and the middle number for not-so-minor changes. Now, somebody has to decide when the first version will start with "1." instead of "0." - hmmm... We're certainly not there for TBNL yet. It's been out for a couple of months only (although I've used similar stuff much longer) and it has only half a dozen active users. Maybe I might call CL-PPCRE "1.0.0" now but then again I should bump the version number at a moment when there are no other changes in the code. Sounds like a no-op to me. I'm glad I'm not in the marketing department... :) Cheers, Edi.

I have been using TBNL for exactly 3 months now. I just didn't want to tell it before finishing the development. No serious problem so far. I'm writing web based application using TBNL(+ Apache + mod_lisp + CLSQL) with 2 colleagues (we're very serious :). We wrote our own web framework on TBNL, and it works great. And yes we really like TBNL. Thanks for TBNL! Without it I might use ugly portable Aserve(I've done it once already, so that is enough). Cheers Jong-won Travis Cross wrote:

Edi Weitz wrote:

...

We're certainly not there for TBNL yet. It's been out for a couple of months only (although I've used similar stuff much longer) and it has only half a dozen active users.

I have been following TBNL for two months now, so you should have at least a half a dozen + 1 active users... :)

There is a definate need for a project like this among those of us who build web applications in Lisp. It doesn't make any sense for everyone to keep reinventing the wheel.

I have one question that I haven't seen come up on the mailing list or in the documentation: what are the hurdles or considerations in implementing multipart form / file upload handling in TBNL ?

-- Travis

_______________________________________________ tbnl-devel site list tbnl-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/tbnl-devel

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:19:17 -0500, Travis Cross <travis@crosswirecorp.com> wrote:

I have one question that I haven't seen come up on the mailing list or in the documentation: what are the hurdles or considerations in implementing multipart form / file upload handling in TBNL ?

See Stefan's reply. My main problem is time. I haven't even found the time to read through all the relevant RFCs. I also think that streams (changing the encoding on the fly) might be an issue here. This feature will probably have to wait until I need it in a project or until someone else provides a working patch. You might want to look at Jeff Caldwell's code at tbnl.org - I seem to remember that he had started working on this. Jeff? Cheers, Edi.