One more project using ispdb

Blake Winton bwinton at
Mon May 17 17:14:43 UTC 2010

On 10-05-17 12:12 PM, David Ascher wrote:
>>> Is there anything specific we need to talk to them about regarding
>>> ispdb?
>> One big thing is that they should mirror our svn version [0], and use
>> the script [1] to generate the configs, instead of running against the
>> ispdb directly. (For a number of reasons, including the
>> non-reviewed-ness of the ispdb configs.)
> They certainly shouldn't talk to the django app directly, but I'm
> wondering what te downside of talking to the front-end http server is,
> if they use a user-agent string to identify themselves? I'm fine with
> them "freeloading" off of what I see as a public benefit service.

Well, the Evolution developers had a problem with the speed and 
connectivity of the website we have it running on.  (So they put it on 
their distributed cluster, with machines all over the world.)

I'm as happy as anyone else to have them point at our configs, but that 
does mean that we might want to test any changes with the various 
clients, at least to let them know if they might break.  (Or possibly 
get them some bugzilla accounts, so that they can help verify configs.)

> Clearly the above assumes some mechanism for us communicating changes to
> the API, and we don't want to have to support third parties beyond our
> own usage of a particular endpoint, but that seems solvable.

ispdb at seems like a reasonable way for us to communicate 


More information about the tb-planning mailing list