incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Fleeky Flanco <fle...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Incubation status
Date Mon, 02 Dec 2013 17:57:20 GMT
i think the most usefull reason to move to github, is that one of the only
active coders feels like doing it .. hence we should support that person :)


On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com> wrote:

> "But for
> that commitment, we need more consensus about what Wave should try to be "
>
> Is there really a lack of consensus here?
> I think , imho, we have a consensus, just not the skill/time.
>
> ~~~
> Thomas & Bertines online review show:
> http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)
>
>
> On 2 December 2013 16:51, John Blossom <jblossom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Christian,
> >
> > Although I support the incubator's goals, it seems that there is
> probably a
> > fundamental mismatch between the state of Apache Wave and where and how
> > Wave needs to develop.
> >
> > I am one of the people who had to stand back from Wave a while back. I
> was
> > enthusiastic about the possibility of Apache acting as a strong framework
> > for Wave, but it seems that it's at the wrong stage of development to
> > benefit from everything that Apache offers. I must also admit that the
> new
> > Gmail inbox doesn't draw me to forum posts as much as it used to. The
> > community tools of Apache aren't getting my attention, for whatever
> reason.
> >
> > Wave is trying to define lots of new bits of technology that don't
> > necessarily have a fixed architecture yet or even a place in other fixed
> > architectures. Months later, we're still at a point where we have a body
> of
> > code that's still largely a specific user client rather than an agile
> > development platform that can enable a wide variety of apps via a common
> > set of communications and data management protocols and standards. Most
> > importantly from my own perspective, it's not moved significantly towards
> > an architecture that could be strongly mobile first with both synchronous
> > and asynchronous publishing. So for me, it's not meeting the goals of
> what
> > Wave 3.0 could be. At the same time you have initiatives like Motorola's
> > Project Ara for open source mobile hardware development that would be
> ideal
> > for some of the things that Wave could do in developing nations, as well
> as
> > open source mobile OS initiatives, so open and mobile as a combination
> are
> > progressing.
> >
> > I wish that I were still an active coder (sometimes), but I am not, and I
> > am not going to be able to reach my goals without committed coders. But
> for
> > that commitment, we need more consensus about what Wave should try to be
> in
> > an increasingly crowded market for collaborative services. From that
> > perspective, Wave seems to need a bit more direction than the Apache
> > framework can manage at this point. There's not a body of code that
> meets a
> > well defined market objective - that's a profile for success in Apache,
> it
> > seems, looking at some of the other projects. Open or not, every platform
> > must find a need and fill it.
> >
> > Finally, since commitment seems to be partially a factor of funding,
> > perhaps a more independent project on Github (assuming that there are no
> > remnant Google claims) might make it easier for independent teams to
> > attract funding via crowdsourcing platforms once a more concrete goal has
> > been defined. Once such a project met with some initial success, perhaps
> > there could be a body of code that could be nurtured in the Apache
> > framework at a later time.
> >
> > I am sorry to have dropped out of this loop, but I have had to focus on
> > money-generating opportunities more intently, if I could balance that
> with
> > Wave a bit more easily then it would be easier to focus, no doubt. But
> life
> > goes on, and I know that Wave will always go on. If there are team
> members
> > who feel that I can contribute positively in this transition, feel free
> to
> > stay in touch.
> >
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > John Blossom
> >
> > email: jblossom@gmail.com
> > phone: 203.293.8511
> > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier <
> grobmeier@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > it seems as the first steam with the new people is gone.
> > >
> > > I believe it makes sense to discuss if the incubator is the right
> place.
> > > Incubation has a specific goal: forming a team which can do releases
> and
> > > is - in a way - active.
> > >
> > > I see there is little activity at all. The only person i have seen
> > working
> > > on the codebase recently was Ali.
> > > He also was the release manager of package which had trouble to receive
> > > the necessary votes from its own team.
> > >
> > > My hope was this would change in the past months. But today I have only
> > > little hope.
> > >
> > > Playing the devils advocate I ask you (again):
> > >
> > > Do you folks believe the incubator can ever be completed as it is now?
> > >
> > > If you believe yes, please let me know why or how we can achieve that
> > goal.
> > >
> > > Otherwise my recommendation is to move Wave to GitHub and close the
> > > incubation until the community around Wave has grown.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Christian
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > http://www.grobmeier.de
> > > @grobmeier
> > > GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
> > >
> >
>

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