" The thing I'm most nervous about is client side work"
My hunch is, provided that there is a good client/server protocol standard,
documented. (and maybe with an example interface library in any language),
clients will spring up quick quickly.
Not sure you would get any fully featured wizz-bang w
I've probably invested about $100k worth of time into ShareJS at this
point (much of that paid for by different employers). It is reasonably
stable and scalable across multiple backend machines. It supports
queries with results which update in realtime. I'm currently dependant
on redis multi-machin
Thanks, Kirill, I look forward to seeing the results!
All the best,
John Blossom
email: jblos...@gmail.com
phone: 203.293.8511
google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Kirill Kostyuchenko
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> We still working hard on wave in our company and I can
Hello all,
We still working hard on wave in our company and I can say for sure,
production ready, scalable wave service will cost more, than $100k. Just
because we already spent more than half. P2P and crypted protocol are
really dreams.
Andrew Kaplanov have done completely new protocol with reco
In case it helps:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/a-month-of-apache-tapestry-5
A successful, if smaller kickstarter style campaign. May help you
visualise what your 'give backs' and suggested donation sizes might be.
Note that this took place within an Apache framework without issues, so
it ca
And let's bear in mind NSA-resistant not just by virtue of good data and
communications bits but also my means of being able to communicate with or
without the public Internet. If everyone is a network node for some portion
of a collaborative data set that can be exposed in various levels of
permis
Joseph,
You may be right, one platform can't do everything, but I am hopeful that
we can get a platform with a 1) data model 2) communications/syncing model
and 3) and apps development model that can accommodate the goals for my
Nkommo project. We start by walking, suss it out and then move on. If
oh, absolutely.
I didn't mean to imply it was that simple, or that was enough by itself.
Merely, over the systems already in use, wave already has a strong
advantage.
~~~
Thomas & Bertines online review show:
http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it
Thomas,
There is more to the security, than simply decentralization.
We had had discussions in the past (on the IRC, not sure if it got to
this list) about how best to encrypt/sign deltas of each user (by
giving each user their own keys) in such a way that the whole wave can
be read/edited by par
"nsa-resistant*"
Thats absolutely a good plus point in this day and age. Its wouldn't be
"proof" by decentralization but
certainly makes things more resistant.
The idea of a federated protocol that lets people selectively share stuff
with others is going to be harder to spy on (on mass) then a nic
This can be a good idea, and I agree with the general design and goals
of your project.
I'm not sure whether this should be a replacement for WiaB, or just a
parallel project that can evolve side-by-side, but if you go forward
with it, we'd just have to wait and see how users and possible
contribu
Will do. As I said, I don't anticipate starting the kickstarter for
about a year, though I want to do preliminary work (prototyping out
some of the protocols and such) now.
John I agree that (1) and (2) are the most interesting parts. But I'm
not sure that this is the right tool to build *everythi
Joseph,
Thanks for chiming in. I'd be interested in getting crowdsourced financing
for this also. We don't have a major corporation funding our lifestyles to
enable such work, so we need something.
I am in general agreement with your overall plan, though as I've stated
before, once you have 1) an
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013, at 05:35 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 1 Dec 2013, at 19:24, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
> >>> My only worry with a KS is how do we market it? As beyo
the beauty of joseph trying to do a kickstarter to essentially restart
development on a 'spiritual' successor to wave is actually wave could still
stay in asf, as a legacy fallback option.
i feel like joseph manning up and really trying to set some real focus to
his own coding goals will be a win-
In defence of the team, it always takes awhile to figure out what the
best way to modularize a software project is when you're implementing
a new idea. The right abstractions always seem obvious in retrospect,
but until you've thought about it a lot its not obvious at all. For
example, moving from
... Not to mention that I'm not completely convinced that I want to
deliver the actual email-like client as part of the project. The thing
that excites me is the platform that people can build collaborative
tools & systems on top of.
I will probably change the name too. From my original post above
Assuming the protocol still maintains waves ability's;
*open
*federated
*selective sharing (that is, sharing X with just a few people)
*realtime
Wave should be the name given to the server to server protocol, imho, but
not much else.
Google made the mistake of calling everything wave. The server to
The proposal seems to include rewriting the OT stack, changing the
language(s) the client and server are written in, and moving to github.
If this is the case, is there any point in still being called Wave?
It sounds like not much will be able to be transferred other than knowledge,
so is there an
On 2 Dec 2013, at 18:35, Joseph Gentle wrote:
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
That all being said, with all the new ideas and hope I would say we
should
postpone the "go to github discussion" a little more. I think ppl
will
support some ASF Wave more than a "random
Matthew:
send an empty mail to: wave-dev-unsubcr...@incubator.apache.org and
follow the instructions then
On 2 Dec 2013, at 18:37, Matthew Murphy wrote:
I’ve been getting these emails for awhile now and none of them are
really relevant to me. I am not a developer just an end user, How do I
I’ve been getting these emails for awhile now and none of them are really
relevant to me. I am not a developer just an end user, How do I unsubscribe?
California Office:
Toll Free:
Skype:
Twitter:
Facebook:209-644-2205
855-544-MKTG
MKTGExperts
@ MKTGExperts Over 6,000 Followers
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1 Dec 2013, at 19:24, Joseph Gentle wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
>>> My only worry with a KS is how do we market it? As beyond putting it
>>> on Hacker News, explaining an P2P OT-backend communic
>
>
> > That said, I pretty much agree with everything else.
> > I would suggest, however, you need a few people ready to work on specific
> > goals for a specific amount. And what can be achieved is kept very clear.
> > Unfortunately no one will understand a kickstarter talking about OT. (or,
> >
Ah, so your not planning to write the server in Java anymore? your starting
from complete scratch? fair enough then - that does lose one of the main
plus points of GWT indeed.
(although, regarding Scala; That is basically Java in terms of sharing). If
its javascript each side though, yes, that woul
Hi,
On 1 Dec 2013, at 19:24, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
>> My only worry with a KS is how do we market it? As beyond putting it
>> on Hacker News, explaining an P2P OT-backend communication system is
>> likely to confuse (if not discourage) potential ba
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
>> I want arbitrary JSON documents, or arbitrary embedding like we talked
>> about a few months ago.
>> I want a protocol based on real P2P algorithms rather than the hacky
>> mess we have at the moment with trees of servers connecting via an
>> XMPP
@Thomas, if you like Java and GWT, you are in luck because there is already
a wave project using those (I refer, of course, to WIAB). I think having
Joseph's project be done in pure JavaScript (and I do prefer writing my JS
directly rather than using another language that “compiles” into JS) is a
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
> " I still want a web client, but it should be
> written in pure javascript."
>
> GWT is already pure javascript. Writing "Directly" rather then via Java
> doesn't give any real advantages in the end result - it just means you rule
> out code s
Joseph,
> So I've spent the last month thinking about running a kickstarter to
> fund the work. Christian's email was really timely.
I had wondered this as well, a while back - but I didn't know anyone
who would be available to actually do it...
(I had hoped that the FundWIAB thing which showed u
" I still want a web client, but it should be
written in pure javascript."
GWT is already pure javascript. Writing "Directly" rather then via Java
doesn't give any real advantages in the end result - it just means you rule
out code sharing between client and server, an give yourself more work in
t
That's actually a really good idea. Id be happy to help out with
organising.
It sounds perfect for Wave, as there's tonnes of interest but not much
programming ability.
I would be interested in helping out with the actual programming but my
expertise is in python not Java.
On Sunday, 1 December
I still really want to make the wave platform we've been talking about
for awhile. I just don't have any time because I need to work to eat.
So I've spent the last month thinking about running a kickstarter to
fund the work. Christian's email was really timely.
I want arbitrary JSON documents, o
33 matches
Mail list logo
