[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Scott Ullrich <sullrich at gmail dot com>
 To:  lola <lola at yais dot net>
 Cc:  Monowall DEV <m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] Re: [m0n0wall] The future
 Date:  Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:10:49 -0400
On 10/12/05, lola <lola at yais dot net> wrote:
> to be honest, i like m0n0wall because it uses php! it makes changes to
> m0n0wall or the gui simple and easy. i think this is a great feature. i
> wouldnt give that up.
>
> just my two cents...

I would tend to agree with this.   Previous to starting pfSense I used
perl extensively for my last firewall project which was closed source.
  After 2 years of development m0n0wall kept growing and growing to be
much stronger than what I previously was working on.  This is a strong
feature IMHO.  php is easy to use, has a low barrier to entry for new
programmers, etc.

In terms of the Operating System, I would take a look at DragonFlyBSD.
 As it's the logical continuation of the FreeBSD 4.X series it is
compatible with everything m0n0wall currently does today.  In the
future, the only parts that still need working on is bringing in Carp,
pfsync and if_bridge.   ATH wireless support already exists and many
report it works well.

In terms of a background daemon, LUA would be a good choice.  It's a
great language and it's small (100K footprint).    Take a look at it
http://www.lua.org/ if you get a chance.  This is what pfSense will be
using for resident daemons.   It will communicate with the GUI via
XMLRPC (already built into php via pear).

Also, in regards to the comment about CPAN, PHP's Pear has a fair
number of PHP extensions as well.

In summary, please do not change the programming language.   Not only
will it be confusing for the developers to switch, it will impede the
flow of possibilities of pfSense and m0n0wall collaborating.  I know
this may not be important to some, but in the long run this could be
beneficial for both projects.

Sorry to ramble.  Just my 2cents.

Scott