Glad to participate as requested, though this is primarily the developers'
discussion. John B
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Upayavira wrote:
> Perfect.
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:57 AM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> > Upayavira,
> >
> >
> > We will put a wiki page together. We will also h
Perfect.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:57 AM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Upayavira,
>
>
> We will put a wiki page together. We will also have the discussion here.
> That said, I would like to select at least three people who sign up to
> shepherd the discussion. Everyone is welcome and the commi
Upayavira,
We will put a wiki page together. We will also have the discussion here.
That said, I would like to select at least three people who sign up to
shepherd the discussion. Everyone is welcome and the committee members
won't have any specific authority. I am just looking for people to f
I'd encourage you to fire up a wiki page and start the discussion here.
I suspect due to te nature of the topic, participants will quickly be
self selecting.
Upayavira
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013, at 10:11 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Michael MacFadden
> wrote:
> >>To st
Michael.
Thanks for putting that out clearly, and yes, you are right. We will
eventually have to solve the problem or find compromises depending on the
target network, If we are aiming towards something like Wave or better. But
we can forget about transport for time being and focus on the OT aspec
Pratik,
The issue here is we are talking about a multi-tiered overlay network.
Base Network
-
Layer 1 is the Internet. That maintains IP connectivity between hosts.
Message Transport Overlay
--
Then there is the collaboration messaging overlay network. Here
:)
Actually, the decision about what documents (wavelets) *are* will
effect naming, which will in turn have ramifications throughout the
code.
Making a hybrid system is one of our options, but I think we still
need to pick a system.
-J
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM, John Blossom wrote:
> Jo
I can imagine dozens of different network configurations that the
system might need to support[1]. But the OT container shouldn't have
to care about the network topology.
Instead the application should give the OT container a stream. The
container is responsible for sending & receiving messages th
Joseph,
This is exactly the sort of transformational architecture that I have been
hoping that you and others would pursue. Being fundamentally P2P but
readily adaptable for scalable client-server architecture seems to fit
today's mobile Web well. The three options that you outline might not wind
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Michael MacFadden
wrote:
>>To start, I want to build a generic P2P OT container. This is a simple
>>wrapper that contains a set of OT documents and defines a network
>>protocol for keeping them in sync. The container needs to be able to
>>talk to another instance o
( I think this was sent to Joseph only, error!)
If OT system actually acts as layer between application sub-components and
transport, where sub-components
may have their own data models, We can have a canonical structure as in
Option 2, managing raw incoming deltas from various
subscribers at vari
Joseph,
Notes inline below.
~Michael
On 6/19/13 11:22 AM, "Joseph Gentle" wrote:
>I've given half a dozen talks about ShareJS over the last 3 years, and
>almost every time I give a talk, someone asks me whether you can use
>ShareJS in a peer-to-peer way instead of just through a single server.
Multiple nodes. We'll have an API that lets you connect to a remote
peer and sync documents.
And Yuri - I wasn't really talking about svn or git ;)
What are your thoughts on the wavelet data model decision?
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Pratik Paranjape
wrote:
> Very exciting! Are you think
Very exciting! Are you thinking about sync between multiple nodes or just 2?
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> Sounds fantastic, especially when it comes from you Joseph.
> Just a side note regarding SVN-Git issue - it is possible to combine both
> by using git-svn - it works fi
Sounds fantastic, especially when it comes from you Joseph.
Just a side note regarding SVN-Git issue - it is possible to combine both
by using git-svn - it works fine for me.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> I've given half a dozen talks about ShareJS over the last 3 year
15 matches
Mail list logo
