incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Retirement
Date Thu, 01 Sep 2016 09:08:23 GMT
Server folk get that gwt away from me!
Gwt folk; get that server stuff away from me!

:P
--
http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site.
http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator.


On 1 September 2016 at 02:40, Evan Hughes <ehugh1@gmail.com> wrote:
> In regards to the meeting, please let us know how it goes ill be unable to
> attend due to my current uni workload (exams and assignments are
> everywhere).
>
> In regards with starting from scratch, I did purpose this idea before hand
> but it is 3 large scale projects on its own, Wave is an interesting project
> in the sense that you have to build most of the entire ecosystem it runs
> on, whether that be a multiuser text editor (for any platform) and an OT
> transform layer that sits below it. Then below those layers sits the server
> which relies on the specs of the Schema's (Document, Conversation, ....).
>
> I believe the current issue with the projects "complexity" is more the
> front end bits which clutter the source, and there is multiple places it
> lives and the dependence issues gwt brings in before the new current
> version (not saying its great but its getting their). Being that this is
> apache, most devs are java devs which arnt the best in front end
> development, sure gwt is great but let it live completely differnt source
> tree so the server can sit by itself, but that means recreating the
> multi-user OT editor which no one so far wants to touch because like the
> people at GitHub have found its very hard to optimise an editor and
> generally using a non native language you are limited in your optimisations.
>
> Just my thoughts.
>
> ~ Evan
>
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 at 09:46 Benjamin B. <wixdesq@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'll do my best to attend this meeting. It will be nice to see and discuss
>> the plan, and from it, see where I can help :)
>>
>> But I agree with Zachary, restarting from zero might not be a good idea..
>>
>> 2016-08-31 16:58 GMT+02:00 Michael MacFadden <michael.macfadden@gmail.com
>> >:
>>
>> > Adam,
>> >
>> > Thanks. I would love to brain stole with you all.
>> > .
>> >
>> > ~Michael
>> >
>> > > On Aug 31, 2016, at 6:58 AM, Adam John <aj@sterlingsolved.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > This is great thinking, Thomas!
>> > >
>> > > Can we use the Google Doc and add your thoughts there?
>> > > Or a copy of it?
>> > > I think email is great and all, but a Google Doc is a suitable Wave
>> > > substitute for this work since in the end what I think we want here is
>> A
>> > > Plan.
>> > >
>> > > These are all excellent questions and worth proper discussion.
>> > >
>> > > 100%: small manageable steps.
>> > >
>> > > Any thoughts on a call / hangout to work things out?
>> > >
>> > > Requested attendees:
>> > >
>> > >   1. Greg Cochard
>> > >   2. Jonathan Leong
>> > >   3. Price Clark
>> > >   4. Thomas Wrobel
>> > >   5. Evan Hughes
>> > >   6. *Everyone on this list!*
>> > >
>> > > ;)
>> > >
>> > > Thanks, again...
>> > >
>> > > AJ
>> > >
>> > > Adam John
>> > > (914) 623-8433
>> > > Google+ <http://google.com/+AdamJohn1> | LinkedIn <
>> > http://mradamjohn.com/>
>> > >
>> > >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> ""an entirely new Wave codebase""
>> > >>
>> > >> Or even the first building block that would become that.
>> > >> If wave goal is defined as something like, "some sort of open
>> > >> federated protocol to selectively share informative securely between
>> > >> users"
>> > >>
>> > >> Would the first steps be too;
>> > >> a) define how data is synced between servers.Presumably from
>> > >> exchanging the changes.
>> > >>    i) OT still I assume?
>> > >> b) define how data is synced between clients.Presumably from
>> > >> exchanging the changes.
>> > >>   i) OT again? maybe closely related to above?
>> > >> c) How to identify users?  (existing standard usable here?)
>> > >>
>> > >> d) Then start implementation of a reference server.
>> > >> e) Then start implementation of a completely separated reference
>> client.
>> > >> f) THEN work on user interface aspects of the (various!) clients.
>> > >>
>> > >> This is all just spitballing. Feel free to put yay, nay or "hell no"
>> > >> next to any of the above.
>> > >> I just think if there is _any_ hope to survive outside apache we need
>> > >> small, manageable steps - hopefully each one useful in itself.
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site.
>> > >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>> On 31 August 2016 at 13:53, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> > >>> Adam,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Whilst I appreciate that you are trying to help with the ApacheWave
>> > >>> repos, I really don't want us to go that way. Wave is already
>> available
>> > >>> on Github as https://github.com/apache/incubator-wave. If this
>> project
>> > >>> folds, and the code goes to live on on github, it must be called
>> > >>> something other than *apache* wave, as to call it Apache XYZ would
>> be a
>> > >>> misuse of a trademark.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Let's decide whether or not the project continues here, and if
it
>> > >>> doesn't, then we'll discuss what happens with the various parts
of
>> the
>> > >>> project once that decision is made.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I still think that the best course of action is for a few people
to
>> get
>> > >>> together and produce an entirely new Wave codebase. We've tried,
and
>> > >>> failed with the codebase we have.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Upayavira
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, at 08:25 AM, Adam John wrote:
>> > >>>> Created a GitHub organization, added each of the available
repos:
>> > >>>> https://github.com/ApacheWave
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> I think I invited everyone on this thread - however there are
many
>> > >> others
>> > >>>> on the list.
>> > >>>> All are welcome.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Loss of Apache incubator status is significant as it means
also
>> > >>>> organizational loss, tools lost, and would effectively put
a nail in
>> > the
>> > >>>> coffin for the project.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> WebCMS, Jira, Jenkins, and Travis are all valuable tools, and
part
>> of
>> > >>>> Incubator status.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Quality code review (thanks, vega and wisebaldone etc) and
an
>> > >> established
>> > >>>> process for the inclusion of new contributions by people familiar
>> with
>> > >>>> existing approaches and the work in progress... all of this
is
>> > >>>> significant.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The people on this list - and even the list itself - both a
service
>> > and
>> > >>>> an
>> > >>>> organization that would be a significant loss in any transition...
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> I think the safety of the incubator is important, for these
reasons
>> > and
>> > >>>> more; and there needs to be improved communication, planning
and
>> > >>>> coordination... here again, just my opinion.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> AJ
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Adam John
>> > >>>> (914) 623-8433
>> > >>>> Google+ <http://google.com/+AdamJohn1> | LinkedIn
>> > >>>> <http://mradamjohn.com/>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk>
wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> The best future for Wave at Apache would, I think be to
start an
>> > >>>>> entirely new project at GitHub, and implement a Wave system
that
>> > >> people
>> > >>>>> can actually understand. Once that gains traction, come
back to the
>> > >>>>> Incubator and ask to resurrect Apache Wave with that new
codebase.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> The current codebase seems to be simply too complex for
people to
>> be
>> > >>>>> able to pick up. The idea stands as a good one, but the
code is
>> just
>> > >> too
>> > >>>>> complex.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Upayavira
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 09:58 PM, Taylor Fahlman wrote:
>> > >>>>>> I've been a reader of this list for a while. I am another
one of
>> the
>> > >>>>>> people
>> > >>>>>> who would love to contribute, but literally have no
idea where to
>> > >> start.
>> > >>>>>> I
>> > >>>>>> really think that if the code was divided a bit more
it'd be
>> easier
>> > >> to
>> > >>>>>> contribute, because I want to see this project keep
going. It
>> > >> really does
>> > >>>>>> have a lot of potential in the current climate of silo-ed
>> > >> communication
>> > >>>>>> systems. An easy docker image would really help too.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:54 PM Thomas Wrobel <
>> darkflame@gmail.com
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> While the code will always be there in some form,
is there any
>> > >> real
>> > >>>>>>> hope outside of Apache though? will it not just
fizzle out?
>> > >>>>>>> Apache provides somewhat needed pressure, structure
and to some
>> > >> extent
>> > >>>>>>> even prestige.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> While retirement is understandable necessity for
things without
>> > >>>>>>> progress, its nevertheless sad for a project with
such
>> > >> potential.  Is
>> > >>>>>>> it possible to put a call out for developers? a
last warning? a
>> > >>>>>>> advert? something beyond this list?
>> > >>>>>>> I have no idea what form it would take though.
I am so ignorant
>> > >> with
>> > >>>>>>> big projects, both socially and structurally. Theres
tools out
>> > >> there
>> > >>>>>>> supposed to help motivate and organised (www.teamily.com)
dont
>> > >> know
>> > >>>>>>> how effectively they are though.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> It just all seems such a waste for wave to die,
its death marking
>> > >> a
>> > >>>>>>> little lost hope for the open web to recover some
ground from the
>> > >>>>>>> closed hubs that dominate today.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> --
>> > >>>>>>> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site.
>> > >>>>>>> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really,
bad story
>> > >> generator.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> On 30 August 2016 at 21:41, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk>
wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>> Michael,
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> As I said earlier in this thread, retirement
means the closure
>> > >> of an
>> > >>>>>>>> "apache" community. The code is already open
source. So long as
>> > >> the
>> > >>>>>>>> trademark and the Apache License V2 on the
code are respected,
>> > >> as
>> > >>>>> now,
>> > >>>>>>>> anyone is free to do what they like with the
code.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Thus, if someone (or someones) wanted to move
it to Github,
>> > >> that'd be
>> > >>>>>>>> fine. I'm sure Apache wouldn't object to them
using the name
>> > >> "Wave"
>> > >>>>> in
>> > >>>>>>>> some form.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Upayavira
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 08:54 PM, Michael
MacFadden wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>> Yuri,
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> Being a mostly silent participant at this
point.  I would tend
>> > >> to
>> > >>>>> agree
>> > >>>>>>>>> with you.  I think however, we should provide
a “what next”
>> > >>>>> option.  So
>> > >>>>>>>>> for example, people might be more willing
to retire the
>> > >> project if
>> > >>>>> they
>> > >>>>>>>>> knew for example we could move to github
and still allow
>> > >> people to
>> > >>>>>>>>> contribute and develop if they see fit.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> ~Michael
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> On 8/30/16, 11:52 AM, "Yuri Z" <vega113@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>    After some thought I hate to agree,
that at current levels
>> > >> of
>> > >>>>>>>>>    participation
>> > >>>>>>>>>    the only rational choice is to decide
to retire as we are
>> > >> just
>> > >>>>>>>>>    wasting
>> > >>>>>>>>>    Apache Foundation resources without
any real hope of
>> > >> graduating.
>> > >>>>>>>>>    Moreover, there were a few active projects
based on Apache
>> > >> Wave
>> > >>>>> that
>> > >>>>>>>>>    felt
>> > >>>>>>>>>    little motivation to contribute back
actively. I think
>> > >> this is
>> > >>>>>>>>>    because they
>> > >>>>>>>>>    found little need in Apache Foundation
resources, while
>> > >>>>> contributing
>> > >>>>>>>>>    back
>> > >>>>>>>>>    required certain effort to comply with
Apache rules.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>    I think we should hold a retirement
vote and either recruit
>> > >>>>>>>>>    sufficient
>> > >>>>>>>>>    number of supporters willing and able
actively participate
>> > >>>>>>>>>    immediately, or
>> > >>>>>>>>>    retire.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>    On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:13 PM Jonathan
Leong <
>> > >>>>> jon.leong@gmail.com
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>    wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> I would hate to see this project retire.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Adam you bring up good points. I can
get the ball
>> > >> rolling with
>> > >>>>>>> the Docker
>> > >>>>>>>>>> image. I'll see what I can get done
over the next week
>> > >> or so.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> -Jonathan Leong
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Adam
John <
>> > >>>>> aj@sterlingsolved.com>
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I have to weigh in and say that
I agree that the bar
>> > >> here
>> > >>>>> was
>> > >>>>>>> set high
>> > >>>>>>>>>> from
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> several perspectives.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm currently evaluating what components
of this
>> > >> project
>> > >>>>> can be
>> > >>>>>>> most
>> > >>>>>>>>>> useful
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> for incorporation into 2 separate
projects. If either
>> > >> one
>> > >>>>> moves
>> > >>>>>>> forward
>> > >>>>>>>>>> in
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> the next 6 months, there will be
more developers
>> > >> actively
>> > >>>>>>> involved here.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> That said, I've watched some of
the transition videos
>> > >> from
>> > >>>>>>> Google folks
>> > >>>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> read a lot of the docs, reviewed
code and worked on
>> > >>>>>>> implementing this
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> project for myself.  It is daunting
and would benefit
>> > >>>>> overall
>> > >>>>>>> from 2
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> significant - imho critical - updates;
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> (1) the Product itself needs real
changes - like the
>> > >>>>> concept of
>> > >>>>>>> bots
>> > >>>>>>>>>> needs
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> pulled out from core terminology
and revamped as a more
>> > >>>>> current
>> > >>>>>>> common
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> concept / ie agents.  There needs
to be better
>> > >> organization
>> > >>>>> of
>> > >>>>>>> the
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Product
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> from concept to contribution. 
This is not to diminish
>> > >> the
>> > >>>>> vast
>> > >>>>>>> resources
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> present, only to highlight an improvement
area.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> (2) the Architecture needs serious
review and revision
>> > >> to
>> > >>>>>>> figure out how
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> best to leverage other projects
and allow focus on the
>> > >>>>> specific
>> > >>>>>>> benefits
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> this project enables.  The technology
stack overall
>> > >> needs
>> > >>>>> better
>> > >>>>>>>>>> separation
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> at least from a newcomers perspective.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> As a third factor, and #1 on my
list for adoption is
>> > >> rolling
>> > >>>>>>> docker
>> > >>>>>>>>>> images
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> for the project.  This is essential
in my humble
>> > >> opinion to
>> > >>>>>>> allow new
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> developers to focus on the pieces
they feel most
>> > >> equipped to
>> > >>>>>>> contribute
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> comfortably...
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I don't know how the major changes
I am suggesting get
>> > >>>>>>> introduced and
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> discussed in much more detail.
 I'm hoping that
>> > >> perhaps I
>> > >>>>> lieue
>> > >>>>>>> of a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> potentially dismissive email "vote"
... Maybe a virtual
>> > >>>>>>> conference would
>> > >>>>>>>>>> be
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> of interest?  I would hope that
the participants of
>> > >> such a
>> > >>>>>>> convention
>> > >>>>>>>>>> would
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> be the core of a nascent rebirth.
 Yes I am
>> > >> volunteering to
>> > >>>>>>> help take
>> > >>>>>>>>>> this
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> on if there is interest...
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Adam John
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> (914) 623-8433
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 30, 2016 12:43 PM, "Zachary
Yaro" <
>> > >> zmyaro@gmail.com>
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I am in a similar boat.  I have
front-end development
>> > >>>>> skills,
>> > >>>>>>> but I
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> struggle to fully understand the
back-end
>> > >> functionality or
>> > >>>>> begin
>> > >>>>>>>>>> separating
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> the client from the server.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Zachary Yaro
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 30, 2016 11:51 AM, "Thomas
Wrobel" <
>> > >>>>> darkflame@gmail.com>
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I have tried on 3 separate
occasions to understand
>> > >> the
>> > >>>>>>> server. Its
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> simply not in my skillset and
I don't have the time
>> > >> to
>> > >>>>> learn.
>> > >>>>>>> I don't
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wish to sound arrogant there,
theres learning needed
>> > >> for
>> > >>>>>>> anything of
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> course. But its too much investment
-  I want to
>> > >> apply
>> > >>>>> skills
>> > >>>>>>> that I
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> already have. Last time I tried
to get into wave
>> > >>>>> development
>> > >>>>>>> (which
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> was I admit a few years back)
it took me 3 days to
>> > >> even
>> > >>>>>>> compile the
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> server. Which is frustrating
for someone that just
>> > >> wants
>> > >>>>> to
>> > >>>>>>> work on a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> client.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> So I am certainly not waiting
for permission, I am
>> > >> waiting
>> > >>>>>>> for a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite  of a server/client
split. I understand
>> > >> I can
>> > >>>>>>> neither
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> demand or expect such a thing.
Developers on a
>> > >> project
>> > >>>>> like
>> > >>>>>>> this just
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> have to jump in on what they
feel like. Nothing can
>> > >>>>> really be
>> > >>>>>>> expected
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> and I accept that.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I simply am informing there's
"lesser" developers
>> > >> like me
>> > >>>>>>> that could
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> work on bits if certain other
things happen.
>> > >>
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message