incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: NodeJS for Sever-Side Wave Code
Date Thu, 30 May 2013 16:51:48 GMT
PP,

Great comments, I agree that brilliance without maintainability can be
risky. We need both.

Here's hoping that we can set the right BHAGs with the right metrics and
messaging that will excite the world as much as we're excited. One step at
a time, but I think that we're getting there.

Many thanks,

John
On May 30, 2013 11:59 AM, "Paulo Pires" <pjpires@ubiwhere.com> wrote:

> See inline.
>
> Cheers,
> PP
>
> On May 30, 2013, at 4:26 PM, Michael MacFadden <
> michael.macfadden@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In my humble opinion we need:
> >
> > 1) A vision and marketing to attract people.  It's hard to attract
>  coders
> > if they don't know what they are coding.
>
> Forget node.js or any other "world-changer-wannabe" frameworks. As Michael
> states, most developers don't understand (or are even scared of) this
> project architecture/structure. Fixing this would be a great start!
>
> > 2) We need a road map.
>
> I'd start with reorganizing code and simplifying the learning-curve for
> developers. Without developers, there's no product!
>
> > 3) We need a design.
>
> Important in the long-term.
>
> > 4) Then we need coders.
>
> Yes, yes, yes!
>
> >
> > Mainly we need coders to help with the release.  Potentially finish off
> > the migration to Maven.  Then we need to start splitting the client and
> > server (along with designing the protocols as we have discussed).
>
> Maven integration kept going (privately) and I have most, if not all of
> the code updated to the last commit.
>
> Thing is that Michael prepared a discussion because of simple but very
> important things like renaming packages and module structure and there was
> little to no feedback from the community. This was more than enough for (at
> least) me to think there was no common interest in what me and Michael were
> doing and therefore I stopped.
>
> >  Perhaps
> > then we redesign the UI, or maybe simply making it more flashy.  Maybe we
> > focus on a mobile client.  Not sure.
> >
> > ~Michael
> >
> > On 5/30/13 4:15 AM, "John Blossom" <jblossom@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting remarks so far from everyone, thanks very much, keep them
> >> coming. I see others coming in.
> >>
> >> Here are some thoughts regarding your thoughts:
> >>
> >> - There seems to be a commitment to get a release out. If that's a
> >> near-term objective, then good, let's allow people to have pride in
> their
> >> work and to have a complete Wave 1.0 kit. If it's a "someday" goal, then
> >> I'd suggest that we need to think about how best we can get resources to
> >> move more towards the vision that I have outlined in my presentation
> deck,
> >> assuming that there's consensus that it be refined into a concrete
> roadmap
> >> and powerful pitch deck. My personal concern at this point is not "ship
> >> it." My personal concern is to make Wave awesome and powerful as soon as
> >> possible using every resource available, using those currently committed
> >> and those yet to be committed.
> >>
> >> - Resources are an issue. So is funding, as a corollary. Both respond to
> >> the right vision for the marketplace. I feel pretty confident that with
> >> some refinement, what is captured in the presentation is funding-worthy
> >> and
> >> will attract funding. However, I am concerned about branding issues and
> >> program management - people putting their money down will want effective
> >> results in a meaningful timeframe, because competitive pressures don't
> >> sleep.
> >>
> >> - I am willing to put my reputation and efforts into being a committer
> for
> >> Apache Wave, if a) there is a strong consensus that the presentation is
> >> the
> >> basis for forming an effective short-term and long-term roadmap for
> Wave,
> >> b) my role as an initial fund-raiser, marketer, product manager and
> brand
> >> developer as a committer is acceptable, c) if we can get agreement on
> the
> >> right branding and brand management that will be appropriate for Wave
> >> being
> >> successful commercially, and d) there is agreement that this will
> require
> >> not just some initial code funding but a framework that will ensure some
> >> level of ongoing support for committers.
> >>
> >> - I am not a coder of any substance anymore, but I designed, coded and
> >> managed coders on Unix-based systems for realtime applications in the
> >> financial industry and have developed and hacked in many Web sites as
> well
> >> as little projects like monkeying around with Arduino. I have spent most
> >> of
> >> my career in strategic marketing and product management for content and
> >> technology products such as Wave. I have spoken globally on visionary
> >> content and technology topics, I have a very good base of social media
> >> followers, I have been quoted in the mainstream press often and I have
> >> appeared on television news shows. Often technology people put me in the
> >> non-tech box and often non-tech people put me in the tech box. I don't
> >> care. I have always worked at the intersection of content, technology
> and
> >> people, so as long as the right thing gets done, you can call me
> whatever
> >> you want. That's what you'd get, no more, no less.
> >>
> >> - I want Wave to succeed. You want Wave to succeed. Others want Wave to
> >> succeed, and a growing number are taking interest in what has been
> started
> >> in this process by me and others. That's what branding, funding,
> >> committers
> >> and cooperation are all about - success. Sometimes that means that
> >> everyone, including me, puts their own investment aside and tries to do
> >> the
> >> right thing. That's a part of the ASF spirit, I know. But I don't want
> >> success by accident. I want success by design.
> >>
> >> So yes, we need committers. For what?
> >>
> >> Solve for x.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> John Blossom
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 30, 2013 5:55 AM, "Christian Grobmeier" <grobmeier@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Bruno Gonzalez <stenyak@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> I agree, IMO efforts should be directed at getting more man power.
> >>> Sadly,
> >>>> ideas are mostly useless if there's no hands that will transform them
> >>> into
> >>>> actual code. I don't know... a solid business plan for a kickstarter,
> >>> some
> >>>> advertising magic that will attract developers to devote their time
> >>> for
> >>>> free, convince the public to donate copious amounts of money to the
> >>> project
> >>>> (this was attempted by the now-offline fundwiab
> >>>> <http://www.fundwiab.com/> initiative,
> >>>> but it only managed to collect maybe 20 hours worth of developer time;
> >>> too
> >>>> little to do any medium sized task), etc.
> >>>
> >>> As Upayavira mentioned, getting a release out is crucial - its an
> >>> important psychological hurdle. Having a release is also motivating
> >>> for others to maybe contribute.
> >>>
> >>> That said, one needs to deal with the man power a project has. There
> >>> is now a John around with lot of ideas. While some might argue you
> >>> need more coders, why are you not building up some marketing-fu
> >>> together with John? He seems to be a good writer and very passionate.
> >>> Maybe you folks should set up a blog (blogs.apache.org?), utilize G+
> >>> and Twitter.
> >>>
> >>> As reminder: in ASF world, not only people who write code can become a
> >>> project committer. Everybody who is "committed to the project" and
> >>> does things, is able to become a committer. This includes marketing
> >>> work, blog posting, helping with translations, answering user
> >>> questions on mailing lists etc.. In Apache OpenOffice, a few people do
> >>> not know what a shell is and have heard of Java just from the press.
> >>> But they do an incredible job with helping users, writing docs,
> >>> testing and contributing to ideas. Hence, they become committers too.
> >>>
> >>> What I want to say: yes, you need more coders. But don't miss a chance
> >>> to get people involved who are not coding. They might become very
> >>> valuable community members + committers with the tons of other tasks
> >>> necessary with Wave.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Christian
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Angus Turner <angusisfree@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Nothing about it not being appropriate, everything about having
the
> >>> man
> >>>>> power. Right now it's hard enough to maintain the code we've got.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I personally would rather wave was written in a 'nice' language
like
> >>> JS
> >>> or
> >>>>> Python, but right now it's not worth the effort.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>> Angus Turner
> >>>>> angusisfree@gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:53 PM, John Blossom <jblossom@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Looking through some documentation on Wave-derived products,
I am
> >>> seeing
> >>>>>> that there is some good use of Node.JS coding for server-side
> >>> functions.
> >>>>>> Why would it not be appropriate to replace some or all of the
> >>> demo-model
> >>>>>> code from Google on the server side with a light and powerful
> >>> language
> >>>>> such
> >>>>>> as this?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Good analysis of Node performance at:
> >>> http://nodejs.org/jsconf2010.pdf
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for your feedback,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> John
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Saludos,
> >>>>     Bruno González
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com
> >>>> http://www.stenyak.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://www.grobmeier.de
> >>> https://www.timeandbill.de
> >>>
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message