also as much as i really really want to do most of this communication on someone (anyone's) wave server has anyone thought of having an official wave irc channel on freenode or something ?
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > Upayavira, Thanks, those are my thoughts exactly. I will not inundate this > community unnecessarily with communications, but I agree that focusing on > having a community that's vibrant and engaged is a key function of this > list. If we get more developers excited and engaged then that's a good > thing - and that's what we need to focus on. Once there's more consensus on > development direction, then we can think about a platform-product channel > as necessary. Perhaps in the meantime we can agree to some subject line > protocol that will make it easier for people to filter messages, such as a > hashtag (#waveforward). > > Best, > John > > email: jblos...@gmail.com > phone: 203.293.8511 > google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > Paulo, > > > > I'm not saying we won't separate, I'm just saying I want us to wait a > > bit. I'm asking you to sit with the pain for a bit longer, so we can > > allow what the other, non-coding discussions are really about to emerge, > > and for others to show up and start engaging with the coding part of > > this project - that's the most important thing in the end. Talk is easy, > > actually doing takes more effort. > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013, at 02:51 PM, Paulo Pires wrote: > > > Please, separate things! Political & management stuff one way, > > > development/user support another. > > > It's really painful to get dozens of e-mails just because of logo stuff > > > and such, no matter how important the subject is. And yes, I can use > > > filters, but still they're not perfect and are PITA to maintain. > > > > > > PP > > > > > > On Jun 6, 2013, at 1:58 PM, "John Blossom - Shore Communications Inc." > > > <jblos...@shore.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Good points all. I am content to continue the Wave:Forward level of > > > > discussion in this venue, as long as we're focusing on the > > re-architecture > > > > of the Wave platform it's very much a development focus. Perhaps > > another > > > > list will make sense when there's more of a product management focus > > for > > > > Wave - but first we need a more marketable platform. So I will > > continue to > > > > feed ideas on market requirements and product specifications here for > > now, > > > > unless something else evolves. And yes, it will be nice to "eat our > > own dog > > > > food" and use Wave itself as the communications platform. > > > > > > > > John > > > > > >
