There can be a workaround at some point though. We can have discussions going on a Wave server for Wave project and make sure that all messages are forwarded to this mailing list as well. If someone responds here, we can have wave pull it out and merge into wave discussion. Interesting use case and fits with what we are trying accomplish.
Realistically, its not going to be easy for a whole organization to replace its primary communication platform unless something equally proven comes along. Another point will be: who reliably pays for the server once it has traffic? In such places, like John mentioned, funding comes handy. On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:46 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > I agree that it makes sense - I'm just asking for patience. Apache > places certain constraints on how people develop software so as to be > able to make clearer guarantees to its users. It will take some time to > be sure that those guarantees can still be offered without compromise. > > Upayavira > > On Thu, May 30, 2013, at 08:10 PM, Fleeky Flanco wrote: > > upayavira, > > > > i strongly agree in shifting discussions like this to wave. since this is > > exactly what it is designed for, if we cant use it for this then what > > good > > is it? also by using it we will see what it truly needs to go forward imo > > and also at the same time you can market it to new people by showing off > > the technology in a real world schenario. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > I'd say build a cool tool that proves it can work. > > > > > > Apache tends to be quite slow to adopt new technologies, notably > because > > > the enthusiasm they bring often wanders to the next cool thing, leaving > > > maintenance in the hands of a small and already over-committed group of > > > admins. > > > > > > If a new technology is going to be used, people are going to want to > > > know that it is going to stay around, and that it covers a range of > > > requirements (e.g. archiving), as mailing lists form the 'corporate > > > memory' of the Foundation, and they'll want to be sure that that memory > > > is 'protected'. > > > > > > So I don't see any reason why discussion couldn't move to a Wave server > > > at some point in the future, but it is important that communication > > > happens in a place where all can participate, that includes folks > > > outside the immediate Wave community. > > > > > > Therefore, the best thing you can do to make it happen is to produce an > > > exceptionally cool and compelling tool that other projects might also > > > want to use. Then a discussion can start to happen. > > > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013, at 07:38 PM, Alfredo Abambres wrote: > > > > One thing always bothered me (for years), and since I lost my > virginity > > > > on > > > > the previous post about "What is Wave?" I can now scratch this itch > :-) > > > > > > > > When will this kind of mailing lists be replaced by wave-powered > > > > discussions for the Apache Wave community (an internal hosted Wave > > > > client)? > > > > > > > > What needs to happen to make this happen? > > > > > > > > I'm extremely curious to know because: > > > > > > > > 1. if we're building a possible email replacement we should have an > > > > answer > > > > and even try to eat-our-own-dogfood (someday) > > > > > > > > 2. I, personally find this medium (mailing lists) too inefficient* > and > > > > noisy, though highly convenient :-) > > > > > > > > *and lots of great/potential discussions and ideas get lost. > > > > > > > > 3. (side-effect) I want to learn what will it need, so I could also > apply > > > > to my other work areas (org/companies). > > > > > > > > Thanks for your answers. > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > >
