Back in the days of Google Wave there was Mr. Ray and Emaily: http://blog.dlux.hu/2010/05/ritmo-2010-google-wave-based-conference.html
also: https://github.com/waveto/mr-ray-open They were trying to build (with some success) a bridge between email and wave. Hope it helps. Perhaps Mr. Balázs Szabó or Thomas Beverley could join and give us a hand on this one ;-) Alfredo On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Bruno Gonzalez <sten...@gmail.com> wrote: > For a first version, we have to keep it simple. My suggestion: > > For new blips, simply email them quoting the parent blip (i.e. inserting > ">" each line). > For modified blips (*), email them with a hardcoded text at the beginning > "*message changed*", quoting the original message (not the parent), for > manually comparing them. Alternatively, insert a unified diff of both > texts. > For deleted blips, email them with a hardcoded text at the beginning > "*message deleted*", again quoting the deleted message. > Ignore anything else (new participants, gadget/robot stuff, etc). > > That'll prolly cover 90% of the uses cases. > > (*) For a modification to trigger an email, wait 15 minutes (or whatever) > after the last change (this prevents continuous tweaks from triggering > email after email). > > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:15 AM, Fleeky Flanco <fle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > the way i see it new replies in a wave can be emailed, but the big > problem > > is how do you deal with a wave being reply being changed, eg how do you > > 'bake down' the dynamic nature of a wave into static email form. > > > > a few ideas : > > > > email every change as a reply in a message thread = extremely tedious > > emails where you see very miniscule difs, could possibly be solved by > only > > emailing when a data change is past a certain percentage threshold of the > > original reply. > > > > email that a change has taken place in a reply but do not send those > > contents = same problem as before > > > > a server side variable that will send a dif of changes periodically, this > > would smooth over the tedious minute to minute possible changes in any > wave > > entry? > > > > none of these seem ideal, the other option is a 'publish' feature wherein > > you freeze a reply at that point it will be emailed out and you can no > > longer make changes to it. > > > > curious what others think about dynamic to static content conversion. > > > > lastly i really think wave's potential as a fast way to display data to > the > > public internet is also a really big killer application of wave but that > is > > a side point. > > > > i am just going to go ahead and start a wave on my own wave server that > > will be a brainstorm and discussion area for wave. if anyone wants to > join > > up its at http://7rnx.net:9898 i am te...@7rnx.net if you register on it > > and tell me your username ill add you to that wave. > > > > fleeky > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:50 PM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > The acid test, is it not. > > > > > > Hopefully it's done in a way that enables both listserv/email > integration > > > and synchronisation as well as the ability to drop other UIs on top of > > the > > > API to expose different aspects of the data set. The most compelling > use > > > case will be a) I really can replace my email server with Wave for > > > collaborative communications whilst synchronising with those who are > > still > > > on email servers and b) I don't have to duplicate data sets to get more > > > value - I just use different components of a given wave, sometimes with > > > other UIs. > > > All the best, > > > > > > John Blossom > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Alfredo Abambres < > > > alfredoabamb...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > *Upayavira* > > > > * > > > > * > > > > Thanks for your explanation, the reasons you stated are extremely > valid > > > and > > > > important. > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > About *Upayavira *and *Pratik Paranjape *idea/suggestion of setting > up > > a > > > > test project for this > > > > * > > > > * > > > > I can't help much in terms of servers and hard-code, but I can assist > > on > > > UI > > > > design and, if needed?, promoting and helping discussions (the What > is > > > > Wave? link that I shared before is an example of what we're doing) > > > > > > > > Would a Wiab like this > > > > http://waveinabox.net/<http://waveinabox.net/auth/signin?r=/> be > > > > enough or we would need to develop a different kind of client? > > > > > > > > > > > > http://alfredo.abambres.com > > > > > > > > *"Moving, always moving, and living inside movement". Rainer Maria > > Rilke* > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Pratik Paranjape < > > > > pratikparanj...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Awesome! > > > > > > > > > > Then perhaps we should take it as our first use case both to > showcase > > > > Wave > > > > > to others and to test how well we are doing. It will drive us > towards > > > > most > > > > > of the functional goals we want to have in the end. Most engineers > > will > > > > > feel better if they know what the purpose of the building is and > > where > > > it > > > > > is supposed to be placed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013, at 08:28 PM, Pratik Paranjape wrote: > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > The sorts of intermediates you mention would be the right kind of > > > > > > approach - maintaining the accessibility people currently > > appreciate > > > > > > with mailing lists, while providing another approach also. > > > > > > > > > > > > As to funding, while Apache doesn't pay people to develop > software, > > > it > > > > > > does have funds to cover server hardware, if a good case can be > put > > > > > > forwards. > > > > > > > > > > > > If folks wanted a place to run a test wave server, for > 'collective > > > > > > play', it wouldn't be too hard to arrange a VM for the purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Saludos, > Bruno González > > _______________________________________________ > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > http://www.stenyak.com >
