incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave <w...@glark.co.uk>
Subject Re: Future of Apache wave [Was: Re: Advantages of P2P messaging?]
Date Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:53:35 GMT
Personally, I would like to see a wave like system with federation 
widely adopted so:
- i can use it for my own collaboration
- it can be made available for integration / other websites & applications
- and allows a choice of clients

Other stuff such as the code/compiler integration might be useful to me, 
but not in the short term.

Federation is really the key thing for me, and WIAB is the closest thing 
I'm aware of to achieving that.

In terms of the problem: Code complexity is the only one that I've 
experienced. The WIAB codebase isn't small, and takes a bit to get your 
head around it. I certainly think that some refactoring, modularising 
the codebase and documentation would ease this.

 From a limited understanding, I think all of my goals can be achieved 
with incremental improvements to WIAB. Of course, I was interested to 
learn about some limitations in the wave algorithms.

---

But my question was more from an observation of recent discussions here 
and on the Wave Forward hangout, about the potential advantages (which I 
don't yet fully understand) of alternative approaches.

There's a fair amount of interest in wave-like services, but a number of 
incompatible approaches. I'm thrilled by the goals of greater 
collaboration between us - and was trying to understand what that means 
in terms of wiab code.

Dave


On 11/06/13 21:28, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Dave,
>
> I guess the question I would ask before going down this road isÅ  what is
> the problem that you are currently seeing in WIAB that you would
> attributed to either the OT Algorithm and/or its implementation?
>
> What problem are we trying to solve through option 1/2?
>
> ~Michael
>
> On 6/11/13 9:25 PM, "Dave" <wave@glark.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Cool.  Thanks Michael.
>>
>> I guess the reason I'm keen to understand the pros/cons is because it
>> looks as though we're heading to a point where the wave community needs
>> to figure out the direction for Apache wave and the wiab codebase
>> (within appropriate [DISCUSS] and [VOTE] threads of course). Probably as
>> part of the larger conversation that John Blossom started.
>>
>> I'm beginning to think we're talking about two discrete directions:
>>
>> 1) The wave OT or protocol are broken & not fit for purpose. We should
>> implement different OT and / or protocol which is (likely) incompatible
>> with the existing implementations. Potentially this could involve
>> junking the current wiab codebase, and implementing a new wave like
>> platform (potentially on top of existing non-wiab code).
>>
>> 2) Wave OT and protocol are good-enough for our immediate / mid-term
>> desires, but the wiab implementations could be stronger. We want to
>> focus on expanding the ecosystem - enabling different clients,
>> simplifying federation, tidying the codebase. I.e. convert what we've
>> got into a useful product.
>>
>> With enough resource, maybe we could aim for Apache wave to take both
>> directions - expand the ecosystem now and work on long-term incompatible
>> changes, but given the lack of an existing install base this might not
>> be an ideal choice.
>>
>> Until recently, I assumed we were just heading for #2, but there's
>> clearly some desire for #1, and some known weaknesses in Wave's current
>> approach.
>>
>> Certainly OT state-of-the-art has moved on significantly since the wave
>> implementation, but should wave be on the bleeding edge of OT? Or are
>> our developers and community more focused on a slick (and feature rich)
>> implementation of the core technology google demo'd a few years back?
>>
>> I've got lots of questions and very few answers, but hopefully we're
>> getting more clarity on what we want/expect from this community.
>>
>> Dave



Mime
View raw message