incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francesco Rossi <>
Subject Re: Wave and Incubation
Date Sun, 15 Mar 2015 11:09:04 GMT
Yuri suggested me in PVT some interesting open alternatives although I 
think they would still lack the options that Wave has.
Just to name 2 of them:

of course they have different functions, but at least they would share 
some Wave dna.
the point is that coding on top of those solutions seemed a lot of work 
just to catch up with the features Wave has.

but I'd be glad to be disputed at this point.

Still, I'm a bit perplexed about the client/server conversation. I 
looked around and just for example, Splash is an old client but looked 
like it was quite split from the server architecture.
What am I missing?

On 3/15/2015 3:51 AM, Bruce Hellstrom wrote:
> The problem is technology keeps marching on while the wave project has 
> remained mostly stagnant.  I wanted to setup an internal wave server 
> at our company and try to get it adopted as the company standard for 
> our communications.  I hate trying to manage email threads that get so 
> long and disjointed.  Wave was such a good solution.  I wanted to wait 
> until the db storage of waves support was put in, which is there now I 
> believe.
> However, the company has started using Slack and I have to say it's 
> hard to argue against that with a beta of Wave in it's current state.  
> Slack has a lot of the features I was looking for in wave as well as 
> clients that work on almost all mobile devices now.  The downside is, 
> the data storage resides with Slack and not on our own internal 
> company servers, but that doesn't seem to be an issue.
> I think Wave is still an awesome product that was ahead of it's time, 
> but now it would just take too much effort to bring it up-to-date.  It 
> needs to support all the latest incarnations of the browsers, which is 
> a moving target now that almost all are on fast release cycles.  It 
> needs full mobile support apps.  I just don't think there's enough 
> people who have enough time to devote to all that needs to be done.
> On 03/15/2015 03:23 AM, Francesco Rossi wrote:
>> Guys,
>> I'm a newbie too and we are thinking of building an entire app over 
>> wave.
>> It sounds really bat that the community is willing to give up.
>> On 3/15/2015 3:14 AM, ujadatron wrote:
>>> It sounds bad.
>>> I'm a "few days newbee" in this mailing list. (I'm looking for a 
>>> flexible open source collaboration framework).
>>> Do you suggest any of them? (if the Wave will retire)
>>> thanks in advance
>>> adatron
>>> 2015.03.14. 22:28 keltezéssel, James Keener írta:
>>>> I was going to write almost exactly the same email and decided not to.
>>>> I found wave and wanted to use it, but it's dependence on the GWT and
>>>> how intertwined the Client and Server were made it very difficult 
>>>> for me
>>>> to understand and I moved to share.js because I could more easily
>>>> comprehend it's inner workings and could build my client around it.
>>>>>> Ideally two projects and a documented protocol would have been best.
>>>> Much
>>>>>> like how email severs and clients can be developed separately, and
>>>>>> standards like pop3 and imap used to talk between them.
>>>> This would have been ideal I feel.  I've seen multiple people on this
>>>> mailing list asking how to integrate with the server and there is 
>>>> never
>>>> a good response.
>>>> Jim
>>>> On 03/14/2015 05:18 PM, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
>>>>> I'll just sadly from my little lurker corner repeat what I have 
>>>>> been saying
>>>>> for 3 years or so now;
>>>>> I wanted to work on a client, despite trying, I lacked the ability to
>>>>> understand the server side code.
>>>>> There was never a clear separation of client and sever that I feel 
>>>>> would
>>>>> have allowed less skilled coders like me to contribute. I was 
>>>>> frustrated
>>>>> when I saw GWT/ GUI issues on the web client being posted at times to
>>>>> fix...and I could have helped with that. But I couldn't, because the
>>>>> bureaucracy of having the sever and client tied together made (for 
>>>>> me)
>>>>> trivial things rather hard.
>>>>> My half-developed phone client remained dead since Googles time as 
>>>>> well
>>>>> because I couldn't figure out how to interface with the changes 
>>>>> made to how
>>>>> you should talk to the sever. I had at one point 3 people helping 
>>>>> me on
>>>>> that project, and with a client/sever protocol we could have all
>>>>> contributed.
>>>>> Ideally two projects and a documented protocol would have been 
>>>>> best. Much
>>>>> like how email severs and clients can be developed separately, and
>>>>> standards like pop3 and imap used to talk between them.
>>>>> I fully acknowledge much of this is my own lack of skills, and with
>>>>> everyone unpaid volunteers I cant expect anything.
>>>>> But this is my hypothesis as to why Wave development wasn't as 
>>>>> active as it
>>>>> could have been.
>>>>> -Thomas Wrobel
>>>>> ~~~
>>>>> Thomas & Bertines online review show:
>>>>> Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)
>>>>> On 14 March 2015 at 21:52, Upayavira <> wrote:
>>>>>> Wave has been incubating for some years now, and, unfortunately,

>>>>>> has not
>>>>>> shown a level of growth that, in my opinion, would suggest that 
>>>>>> it is
>>>>>> likely to reach graduation from the Incubator.
>>>>>> Unfortunately, I think it is time we accept that Wave is unlikely
>>>>>> reach graduation, and should retire.
>>>>>> To explain what this means - as I understand it, the ASF repo 
>>>>>> would be
>>>>>> marked read-only, and after a period of time, the lists disabled.
>>>>>> The code would, however, remain open-source, and any person, or 
>>>>>> group of
>>>>>> people would be free to fork the code and continue with it 
>>>>>> elsewhere,
>>>>>> e.g. Github/Sourceforge/etc.
>>>>>> In the end, this is a decision of the Incubator PMC, however I’d

>>>>>> like to
>>>>>> see whether anyone here has any thoughts to add before I put this

>>>>>> to the
>>>>>> wider Incubator community.
>>>>>> Upayavira
>>>>>> P.S. This came up on the incubator-general list as a part of a
>>>>>> discussion on the Wave report

View raw message