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: Wave without GWT
Date Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:10:06 GMT
I agree that there's a huge opportunity for the right protocol and API,
especially in mobile and non-Internet markets, but not exclusively. What
we're left with right now is email as the only open and global
store-and-forward federated communications protocol for document
collaboration - the rest exists as APIs on private clouds of one sort or
another. Nobody really gets to own their own data any more. If we create
the right protocol/API and the right environment for selling apps, Wave can
go far. But as long as we're just making old code work a bit better,
nothing advances.

IMO, of course.

All the best,

John Blossom

email: jblossom@gmail.com
phone: 203.293.8511
google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom


On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, let me put it like this for my end;
> As soon as there is a open API that allows persistent, yet
> selectively-shared, information and works by federated servers (without
> merely sending a copy to each user like email), then I'll be making clients
> using it. I'll be making 3 clients probably. A basic text one to get to
> grips with the API. An Augmented Reeality focused one (
> https://code.google.com/p/skywriter/ is waiting for a protocol - has been
> for years), and a map based gwt web one designed to use with it.
> https://code.google.com/p/skywriter/ has been my pet project basically
> killed due to Waves lack of progress, and me not having the skills or time
> to get the progress done in areas I need. Honestly, I had such success
> during the Google era it let me a bit heartbroken.
>
> As for wave alternatives I have been shocked frankly that even things I
> thought were pretty well developed have rather bad support. Even
> non-persistent XMPP, a lot of the libraries are outdated or abandoned for
> years. The only things supported seem to be "run your own server and screw
> federation" solutions. Which I dont accept to be a solution for any open
> system like this.
> Theres still a big gap in the market for a wave protocol. Its just very
> hard to explain/prove it.
>
>
>
>
>
> ~~~
> Thomas & Bertines online review show:
> http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)
>
>
> On 13 June 2014 03:30, John Blossom <jblossom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have a lot on my plate but I am looking more seriously at crowdfunding
> > for Wave 3.0. The only way that I see Wave taking off is with clearly
> > segregated and secure APIs for mobile apps that interface with
> > apps-independent distributed waves.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > John Blossom
> >
> > email: jblossom@gmail.com
> > phone: 203.293.8511
> > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > If it is I'll be jumping for joy, but as far as I know its still pretty
> > > tied together.
> > > Compiling the server without GWT is the easy bit, separating the
> existing
> > > client from the sever code - or recreating enough to have your own
> client
> > > seamlessly communicate I don't think is very easy. I don't even think
> > > theres an up to date protocol documented anywhere.{/hopes to be wrong]
> > >
> > >
> > > ~~~
> > > Thomas & Bertines online review show:
> > > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
> > > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2 May 2014 15:14, John Blossom <jblossom@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > But is the app "segregated" enough now that you can still get the
> > > > functionality that one requires for concurrent edits, etc.
> > > >
> > > > All the best,
> > > >
> > > > John Blossom
> > > >
> > > > email: jblossom@gmail.com
> > > > phone: 203.293.8511
> > > > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Yuri Z <vega113@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes, you don't have to compile the GWT.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Jim Keener <jimktrains@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is there a way to build the wave server without any of the GWT
> > front
> > > > > > end?  My end goal would be to use the Wave server over a
> websocket
> > > with
> > > > > > a custom (application-specific) front end.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jim
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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