Can you show example how you work with your objects using this network?

It��s not fully decided yet. I��m just trying to show that 2 peers A and B can exchange and sync information without central server, but also considering they have multiples devices (connected on demand P2P - offline first is a major requirement).

So for now, to test, I just connect A and B through basys by sending a connection in both direction A->B B->A. I think ok keeping a "message hub �� specific to each interaction A can have with B(s), C(s)... A queue but that kind of never deletes messages but changes its meta content - so as to sync with other devices when they eventually connect).

So for now, my need is quite simple regarding connections.

I used mostly for now #sendDataPacket:

I could do it also with Zinc in HTTP. But, as always in Smalltalk, I explore in plenty of directions and discover great stuffs like Seamless perfectly usable and some less finished or older gems like BitTalk or UbiquiTalk�� Very interesting as I will need more functionalities to deal with decentralized networks.

BasisNetworkStub is only created for tests. And I think it misses one important function: how identify peers. When your image get new connection it should identify what remote peer is connected by it. So two connections from same remote image should be identified as single peer instance on your local image.

Yes, sure I��ve spotted that and I definitely need a way to identify peer-devices (belonging to a peer realm/swarm). I��ll do later.

I would of course use Seamless for distributed applications because it allows to implement solution with objects locally and then transparently split them over network.
But Seamless not implements any kind of message queue. So I would use some proven solution for it instead of custom implementation. But it can depends on the task.

Do you think of something in particular ? :)

For now my queue will only be ordered collections or whatever simple collection. It should be enough to start with.

2) or may I use Seamless straight with restrictions (I wonder if limiting the classes that can be executed would suffice - proxies should only be on the peer inbox and outbox I think) ?
3) or maybe I should do a lighter version of seamless ? If so where should I look at/change ?

You can try subclass SeamlessNetwork and override request processing method with special restrictions on what requests are permitted. Maybe you can propose such kind of policy to the Seamless itself.

Subclassing Seamless seems to be a very good simple and powerful possibility (to get inspiration too) and I may do that.

Anyway most of what I have to do is build a system that seamlessly present to the user information extracted from messages (stored locally- versioned) => its actually just transposing what you all are used too with tools like git but applied to �� general information exchange and processing ��.

Enterprise information systems are so boring�� they should be far more a la smalltalk ^^

Cheers,

C��drick