seperate the event/task engine from UI ?
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 5:30 pm
Hi,
I've just started using HouseBot and find it very flexible and intriguing (my previous home control system was a small nest of perl scripts which migrated from unix to windows). I've not explored all of housebot yet, and my current setup is not too fancy, but I am looking forward to integrating my one-wire network of temperature sensors
Feature-wise, housebot is great for me, but I'm wondering if there might be any plans to change the fundamental design such that the event/task processing could run as a stand-alone windows service ? Thus the management UI would be a separate program run by allowed user accounts that communicates with the service engine. Yes, I'm a Windows 2k/XP user and not Win9X, and I'll be the first to admin I'm not sure if such a split design is easily supported for all windows OSs. However, managing a true service on a windows server (including embedded XP) seems much easier to maintain/monitor/restart after crash, power reboot, or automatic OS patch application, therefore the overall home control system would tend to be more robust (?)
-- brad
I've just started using HouseBot and find it very flexible and intriguing (my previous home control system was a small nest of perl scripts which migrated from unix to windows). I've not explored all of housebot yet, and my current setup is not too fancy, but I am looking forward to integrating my one-wire network of temperature sensors
Feature-wise, housebot is great for me, but I'm wondering if there might be any plans to change the fundamental design such that the event/task processing could run as a stand-alone windows service ? Thus the management UI would be a separate program run by allowed user accounts that communicates with the service engine. Yes, I'm a Windows 2k/XP user and not Win9X, and I'll be the first to admin I'm not sure if such a split design is easily supported for all windows OSs. However, managing a true service on a windows server (including embedded XP) seems much easier to maintain/monitor/restart after crash, power reboot, or automatic OS patch application, therefore the overall home control system would tend to be more robust (?)
-- brad