Hi James, I know everything is in transit to the new location and everything is starting up, we'll have time to discuss this and more things in the future for sure ;)
jesus On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:37 PM, James Purser <jamesrpur...@gmail.com>wrote: > Jesus, > > Okay here's my two cents worth. > > Right now, at this time, our focus needs to be on getting the incubator up > and running. This means moving the WIAB code base from the current > code.google home (and from mercurial to subversion, which is going to be > "interesting"). > > Until we've got the core setup finalised I think we're going to have to put > off adding new implementations. Once we're setup then sure I think there is > an argument that we can support different implementations of the specs. > > Just give us a little time to get the new house setup then we can start > looking for new housemates :) > > James > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Jesus Salas <jesus.sa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Torben, > > > > It seems for what you say you want to keep Wave isolated from other > > possible > > technologies and implementations, > > what IMHO is against the nature of this project and the potential for > Wave > > technology > > > > IMHO, Wave is just a bunch of Specs anyone must be able to implement > using > > any technology, it has become an Apache Project, Open Source, and is not > > longer a Google Project, so it will move forward by individuals, (like > > people from google present here and others), and others entities, like in > > my > > case a company, contributing to this technology to grow, that for what I > > know is quite usual in Open Source projects, isn't it? > > > > So keeping this in mind any reference code using any technology for > > Servers, > > Clients, APIs or any other piece of code, must be welcome just now in > the > > project and not just the initial implementation provided from Google > Wave. > > > > Probably, code provided from Google will be the reference or core > > implementation growing faster and having the latest specs implemented for > > maybe a long time.. > > > > Againg IMHO behaving in this way you are limiting so much Wave > possibilites > > to have a nice start and be more broadly adopted. > > In the end you can give to the project more chances to survive, grow, get > > more adepts and spread around the community and the computing world in > > general... > > > > What will happen if you found in the mid-term you get more developers > > interested to join project using c# platform than current Java > > implementation and c# is the technology pushing forward Wave? it could > > happen or not but is one possibility you cannot ignore... > > > > Of course if you 'close down' Wave technology to a 'official branch' of > > Java > > code this never will happen, and probably you will miss sponsorship from > > many companies and a lot of interest from many people to be able to > create > > use cases and push the technology... > > > > Trust me, technology is not important, just Specs are important and any > > Server, or Client, API, partial implementation or anything Stable > compliant > > with Specs must be welcome from my point of view, Wave Community will > grow > > with this kind of contributions... > > > > Tell me you want to have just one Reference code on Apache Wave project > and > > you, for some reason, want the one provided by Google to be the unique > and > > alone forever, what I have nothing against, if all people in the project > > agree, but please, do not tell me 'you are going to encourage other > > implementations' for Wave technology as ANY implementation will be valid > as > > long as stick to Specs and works and must be welcome to create 'momentum' > > to > > the Wave technology. > > > > And If I can be part of this project, and someone, anybody, is trying to > > contribute with a large codebase from a commercial product making it > > available as open source I would appreciate his effort and be completely > > happy and interested on this to happen and I'll accept his contribution, > > probably on the main trunk and encourage others to push, if 6 months > later > > I > > realize it was not a good idea, or there is nobody supporting that > branch, > > myself will propose to remove it from the offical project site. > > > > Honestly I really don't know what is the state for your 'lightweight' > > project or how broad it is, or what capabilities it has, so I can't know > if > > it is comparable with > > a commercial-quality level product like wave-vs and its 120 KLOC > > > > Are you aware you are 'refusing' thousand of lines of code from a real > > commercial product designed and implemented by professional Software > > Architects? (I'm not saying current or future available implementation > for > > WiaB or other piece of code does not have a similar quality! because I > know > > it has this quality!) > > > > As far as I know, there is only a few commercial projects using Wave > > Technology. But can you tell to me how many of them are already released, > > working, growing and with a stable and growing base of real clients? > > > > We have the possibility to continue developing this technology isolated > > from > > this Wave Project as we have our own implementation for everything > (server, > > client, apis, protocols....), even so, we'd love to continue sticking to > > the > > Specs created by this group and contribute to it as much as possible... > > > > I'd love to listen your opinion about this as well as the opinions from > > people in the Project... > > > > PS: I just wanted to share my thoughs with people in this project and to > > show we have a real interest and power to participate, was not my > > intention > > to complain or to push against somebody, I'm not native english speaker > and > > I know my English limitations can show other attiture for what I say that > > is > > not really intentionally so my apologies if someone feel this email goes > in > > the wrong way because evreything is really 'in my humble opinion'... > > > > > > Regards > > Jesus Salas > > wave-vs.net CTO > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Torben Weis <torben.w...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Jesus, > > > > > > my understanding of the move to Apache was that this is mainly a WiaB > > > thing. > > > Thus, Apache Wave (formerly WiaB) is one implementation of the Wave > > > standards. > > > > > > We encourage other implementations of Wave technology (for example my > > > lightwave project > > > is written in Go). However, my understanding is that these > > implementations > > > will not > > > sail under the Apache Wave banner. > > > > > > On the long run we even plan to spin off the specs to make the point > that > > > the specs are > > > independent and Apache Wave is "just" one implementation of these specs > > > (albeit the > > > most complete and standards compliant one). > > > > > > To make wave a success we need multiple implementations, Apache Wave > > being > > > one of them. > > > If you want to start a C# wave server (which sounds like a great idea > to > > > me), put the code up on > > > code.google.com or github and inform this list. Once we have moved our > > web > > > pages we need to keep track of other wave implementations and link to > > them > > > from the Apache Wave web sites. > > > > > > Greetings > > > Torben > > > > > > 2010/12/12 Jesus Salas <jesus.sa...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > Hi Soren, > > > > > > > > I was not thinking to contribute on main Java trunk, (as I didn't > have > > > > enough Java Knowledge), but to begin contribute to a c#.Net > > > implementation > > > > for wave. > > > > > > > > I can and I really want to 'open source' pieces of wave-vs.net, > > (Several > > > > KLOC), and provide this to make wave technology as broadest as > > possible. > > > > > > > > Even if main implementation work continues to be Java technology I > > think > > > a > > > > potential c# implementation as a "Port" or "Contrib", (whatever you > > think > > > > is > > > > the best), is possible and desirable to make Wave stronger. > > > > > > > > As I never have work on an Apache or Open Source Project I'm blind on > > how > > > > it > > > > is structured or how it works, so you will need to guide me most of > the > > > > time > > > > on how to do things until I learn a bit... > > > > > > > > I have to ask if you think is a good idea to open this .Net branch > for > > > Wave > > > > Technology sponsored inside the Apache Incubator Project. > > > > > > > > jesus > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Soren Lassen <so...@google.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Jesus, > > > > > > > > > > You don't need an account to contribute. You can check out the the > > > > > source code (see > > > > > http://code.google.com/p/wave-protocol/source/checkout, > > > > > http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-in-a-box/setting-up) and then > when > > > > > you have added your code or made the code changes you want to > > > > > contribute, send it for code review: > > > > > http://www.waveprotocol.org/code/submitting-code > > > > > > > > > > Once someone has reviewed your code and you've made the changes > that > > > > > you and the reviewer(s) agree on, a committer will apply your code > to > > > > > the repository for you. You will need to sign a contributor > agreement > > > > > first: > > > > > http://www.waveprotocol.org/code/committers > > > > > > > > > > At least that's how it works right now. There will be changes to > the > > > > > way we work with the code repository and code reviews as we switch > to > > > > > Apache's tools and processes in the near future. > > > > > > > > > > Soren > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Andrus Adamchik > > > > > <and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > > > > > > To become a committer you need to start contributing to the > > project. > > > > E.g. > > > > > read these messages earlier in this thread: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://bit.ly/eeEfjn > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Jesus Salas wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> I mean ... for a commiter account... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> jesus > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Jesus Salas < > > > jesus.sa...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> Sorry me, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> How to submit or a Committer account? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> thank you > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Andrus Adamchik < > > > > > >>> and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Yes, I will handle it. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> It was my intent to attempt to gather information on as many > > > > committer > > > > > >>>> accounts as we can before sending infra request, but yes I > fully > > > > > expected > > > > > >>>> that out of this long list not everybody will be able to reply > > > > > immediately. > > > > > >>>> So my plan now is to wait a couple more days, then check with > > > > > secret...@about the CLA's (none of the last week CLA's are > recorded > > > > yet), > > > > > and then > > > > > >>>> send a request to infra based on the information collected so > > far. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andrus > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> On Dec 11, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Upayavira wrote: > > > > > >>>>> I agree, we should get some done soon. Are there any more we > > can > > > > get > > > > > >>>>> done quickly? If Andrus isn't able to send in an account > > request > > > > over > > > > > >>>>> the next few days, I'll happily do it. Andrus? > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Upayavira > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:55 -0800, "Michael MacFadden" > > > > > >>>>> <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> What is the timeline for getting the accounts created. > Again > > no > > > > > rush, > > > > > >>>>>> just curious. Appreciate your mentorship / help. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Thanks. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Michael > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:37 PM, Soren Lassen wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> a) done > > > > > >>>>>>> b) soren or sorenlassen > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> thanks > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Andrus Adamchik < > > > > > >>>> and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Michael MacFadden wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> -- Committer Accounts -- > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> I assume for those on the initial committer list who > don't > > > > > already > > > > > >>>> have them, we will need to get accounts. Who coordinates > that? > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I will send the request to create committer accounts. We > > need > > > to > > > > > do > > > > > >>>> some preparation before that though. So below is a list of > > > > committers > > > > > from > > > > > >>>> the proposal, excluding those who already have an account > > @apache. > > > I > > > > > suggest > > > > > >>>> the following procedure: > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> (a) everybody on the list please print, sign and submit a > > > > > Contributor > > > > > >>>> License Agreement [2], except for those who already did; > > > > > >>>>>>>> (b) reply to this message (or to me privately to prevent > > list > > > > > noise) > > > > > >>>> with 2 versions of a UNIX account name that you would like > (this > > > > will > > > > > also > > > > > >>>> be your email at apache dot org). Use [1] to check whether any > > > given > > > > > name is > > > > > >>>> taken. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Once we have all CLA's on file, I'll submit a single > request > > > to > > > > > infra > > > > > >>>> to create accounts. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Alex North > > > > > >>>>>>>> Anthony Watkins (there's a CLA for 'Anthony LaMarr > Watkins' > > on > > > > > file) > > > > > >>>>>>>> Christian Ohler > > > > > >>>>>>>> Dan Danilatos > > > > > >>>>>>>> David Hearnden > > > > > >>>>>>>> David Wang > > > > > >>>>>>>> James Purser > > > > > >>>>>>>> Joseph Gentle > > > > > >>>>>>>> Lennard de Rijk > > > > > >>>>>>>> Michael MacFadden (there's a CLA on file) > > > > > >>>>>>>> Soren Lassen > > > > > >>>>>>>> Tad Glines (there's a CLA on file) > > > > > >>>>>>>> Torben Weis > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> [1] http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html > > > > > >>>>>>>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/ > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Cheers, > > > > > >>>>>>>> Andrus > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > --------------------------- > > > Prof. Torben Weis > > > Universitaet Duisburg-Essen > > > torben.w...@gmail.com > > > > > >
