Please refer to http://www.cdin.org/ for more info.
However, I would not hold that up as the de facto reference. While
Python is a fantastic language, having a reference implementation in C
would probably be better. Hell, I'd rather see an Apache module
myself... (I may do this based on some of my mod_dav work)
So... if you're itching to code, then please go for it. Take a look at
the spec and table design that I posted to the web site; if that agrees
with you, then you're set.
Of course, if you're talking about the *client* side... well. Go fight
it out with Mike Oliphant :-)
Cheers,
-g
Jeffrey Baker wrote:
>
> sounds good. Let me be the first to volunteer to implement the HTTP XML
> server.
>
> Jeffrey
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu
> > [mailto:owner-freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu]On Behalf Of Paulo
> > Candido
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 1:22 PM
> > To: Mike Oliphant; cdindex nospam at freeamp.org;
> > freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu
> > Subject: RE: Ok
> >
> >
> > I think we should:
> >
> > a) Implement CDDB as is. Everything relevant is free/gpled. Our problem
> > here is the database. Once we are up and running, we can immediately
> > offer this as an alternative to Escient. That would answer the
> > developers need for a current alternative.
> >
> > b) Start working a new, more inclusive protocol. While the new database
> > is hopefully populated by hordes of free-lunch-corporate-hating(:))
> > users, we can calmly sit down and get to the business of protocol
> > writing. I suppose we should consult with the MP3 people and look around
> > for other similar efforts. In the end, an RFC would be a good result.
> >
> > c) Once we have a draft for a new protocol, set up a server to answer
> > requests in both the new and the old format. Issue reference
> > implementations for client code and server code.
> >
> > d) Mark a date to stop supporting the old protocol. It may be far away
> > in the future. A year, maybe. But let it be set and let the developers
> > be warned.
> >
> > Does it sound good enough?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu
> > > [mailto:owner-freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu]On Behalf Of Mike
> > > Oliphant
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 5:38 PM
> > > To: cdindex nospam at freeamp.org; freecddb-developer nospam at bigred.lcs.mit.edu
> > > Subject: Ok
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok, I'll back off on my initial opposition to XML. I can see the
> > > extensibility argument. As a user/cd-player-author, I just
> > > want to insure
> > > that cd-lookup is a quick. low-bandwidth operation.
> > >
> > > It seems as though everybody has great plans for a new format. This is
> > > good, but what we really need is a practical, easily implementable,
> > > more-or-less CDDB compatible system (at least at the server
> > > end), and we
> > > need it soon.
> > >
> > > We need a system that will allow us to get disc title/artist/track
> > > information from some form of ID quickly and easily. Idealy,
> > > it will also
> > > allow us to add additional information as time goes on.
> > >
> > > I'll support such a format in my applications (Grip/GCD) if,
> > > and when, it
> > > emerges.
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
-- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/