@evan, of course, using proto format it is perfect.
2016-12-24 15:45 GMT+01:00 Evan Hughes :
> @pablo though maybe json should be the standard since through the websocket
> trying every possible message would be a waste. I still think the proto
> format is a good specifier.
>
> On 24/12/2016 10:0
@pablo though maybe json should be the standard since through the websocket
trying every possible message would be a waste. I still think the proto
format is a good specifier.
On 24/12/2016 10:08 PM, "Evan Hughes" wrote:
> I believe it was in the works but cant hurt to add it to the jira as a
>
I believe it was in the works but cant hurt to add it to the jira as a
feature request.
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 at 22:04 Brandon Brinkley wrote:
> This is timely, as I have just recently renewed my interest in Wave with
> the idea of potentially bundling it with a few other services that could be
>
This is timely, as I have just recently renewed my interest in Wave with
the idea of potentially bundling it with a few other services that could be
useful for small teams (e.g. students, auditors, etc.). I haven't had a
chance to look at it much yet, but I would want to either share the
authentica
1) The Json representation is made from the protobuf using proto3's json
form. So think of the proto files as a specification in essence and they do
reduce the data bandwidth needed and the amount of storage needed.
2) The atmosphere websockets implementation is a bit dated and can be
written usin
Hi Evan,
That's cool. Two questions...
- Is there any advantage providing the API's data as protobuf insteand just
JSON? It might be easier just to provide the latest.
- It seems good idea to have a separated URL context for the API
Also, there are some improvements in SwellRT's servlets regardi
