libCurl wrapper using LiveCode Builder [was: Re: SFTP support]

Lyn Teyla lyn.teyla at
Wed Aug 19 18:12:53 EDT 2015

Peter TB Brett wrote:

> On 2015-08-19 21:53, Lyn Teyla wrote:
>> If a libCurl wrapper using LCB is in development, wouldn't the above
>> be a non-issue? That is, adding SFTP (or any other libCurl-supported
>> protocol) shouldn't need to involve writing and testing a lot of new,
>> security-critical code, since libCurl has already taken care of that?
>> Or am I missing something?
> It's not "in development".  I started it (i.e. I wrote about 100 lines of code and opened a massive can of worms in the process).  Then I stopped and found a different solution.

Ah, didn't realize that. Thanks for the clarification.

> There's a *lot* of research and development still to do before we can produce a generally-useful LCB URL library based on libcurl.  That doesn't mean that we don't want to do it, or that we don't think it's worth doing!  It *does* mean that, if we're talking about an internally-funded project, we're much more likely to be able to provide a Business-only SFTP extension than do a big refactor around LCB and libcurl.  This is just the reality of the resources available.
> On the other hand, if there was external funding for such a project...

But that's just it — the network/sockets revamp using open language (presumably LCB) *is* one of the items on the roadmap from the Kickstarter campaign. While SFTP isn't specifically mentioned, that "generally-useful LCB URL library" is. Here's the roadmap again:

What I'm trying to say is that if you were to go the libCurl (or another similar ready-made library) route, then not only would you have the "generally-useful LCB URL library", but it'd then be much easier to add SFTP and other protocols via that same LCB library.

Otherwise, you guys would be spending extra time unnecessarily reinventing the SFTP wheel, yet still only benefit Business license holders, whilst not meeting one of the goals on the roadmap upon implementation (pretty much a lose-lose-lose situation).

You did just mention that it's a "big refactor around LCB and libCurl", so it sounds like a lot of work is going to be involved just to get an LCB URL library ready.

I hadn't expected *that*, as my (possibly erroneous) impression during the fundraiser was that open language (LCB), once in place, would allow for the "easy wrapping" of just about any external library, since a revamp of the Database library via LCB is also listed on the roadmap.


1. Business-only SFTP = waste of precious time that could have been spent on other things

2. LCB URL library = good use of time that meets a goal for something that *has* been funded!

I suppose what it comes down to is that you might have mistaken the LCB URL library to be an internally-funded project, when it's actually an externally funded one.

Hope this makes sense. :)


More information about the Use-livecode mailing list