Bruno: The new https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wave/experiments/ directory could probably be the best place to host/put this "project", what do you think?
http://alfredo.abambres.com *"Moving, always moving, and living inside movement". Rainer Maria Rilke* On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) < sten...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some background: > > The motivation of the bot is mainly to allow migrating the apache-wave > mailing list discussion into a wave-based platform (so that we can eat our > own food). > > It's not necessarily my intention to "embed" the bot into WiaB, but that > has been the easiest route for me. If this could run as a regular bot (not > an embedded agent), separate from WiaB, that would be great. Maybe there > are other solutions better than a robot of any kind. But I haven't had time > to experiment that much, and I think it's better to contribute something > bad than not contributing anything :-) > > Given the lack of maturity (or design) of this feature, I'd suggest not to > put it in trunk, but maybe in a separate branch. This is up to the > community to discuss. Either way, I uploaded the branch for code review > simply because I'd prefer this code to be hosted with the rest of > wave-related code at apache, rather than wherever is trendy at the moment > (googlecode, github, etc). > > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Zachary “Gamer_Z.” Yaro > <zmy...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > Wait—so this is being done with a 'bot, but the 'bot is baked into the > WIAB > > server? Might it be better to separate the 'bot out so it can be used > with > > hypothetical future wave clients? > > > > Please correct me if I misinterpreted your message. > > > > —Zachary “Gamer_Z.” Yaro > > On Jun 19, 2013 2:21 PM, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I think you can go ahead and send a patch. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) < > > > sten...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Haven't worked on the bot much these days, but I've cleaned up the > > > commits > > > > so that I can publish what I already have. Keep in mind this is an > > alpha > > > > version, it lacks many features, has many bugs, etc. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/stenyak/wave/commits/maillist > > > > > > > > The email bot configuration is done directly in code: > > > > > src/org/waveprotocol/box/server/robots/agent/AbstractStkRobotAgent.java > > > > After it suits your liking, recompile and run. > > > > > > > > > > > > Usage: > > > > * Add "maillist-bot" address to a wave. > > > > * Whenever you want a blip to be sent as email, write bot:send\n > > > (this > > > > means you press enter) > > > > * The bot will detect this, remove the magic words you just wrote, > and > > > > send the email using the configuration specified in the sendEmail > > > function. > > > > > > > > I would be happy to have this code included as a branch in the > official > > > > apache-wave repository, but would prefer to be able to directly > commit > > > (as > > > > opposed to having to squash several commits together into a .patch > > file, > > > > send it for review, yadayada). If that's not possible, github would > be > > > the > > > > official repo for maillist-bot development. > > > > > > > > Feedback and contributions are welcome! :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Alain Levesque > > > > <albon...@wavewatchers.org>wrote: > > > > > > > > > I do have time also to be a ''regular user'' . Feel free to contact > > me > > > as > > > > > neeeded. Bravo! Bruno > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Alfredo Abambres < > > > > > alfredoabamb...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Bruno for trying to make this. I can't be much of > > > assistance > > > > on > > > > > > this point, but if you need a "regular user" to help you test it, > > > just > > > > > wave > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > http://alfredo.abambres.com > > > > > > > > > > > > *"Moving, always moving, and living inside movement". Rainer > Maria > > > > Rilke* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) < > > > > > > sten...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right now, in part due to its alpha state, and in part due to > > bugs > > > (I > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > receive newBlip notifications, etc), emails are only sent when > > the > > > > user > > > > > > > writes "bot:send\n". At that very moment, the bot sends a > single > > > > email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding synchronization schedule, we could keep a list of > > "blips > > > > not > > > > > > yet > > > > > > > synced to email", each of which would have a timeout. Whenever > > the > > > > blip > > > > > > > contents is edited, the blip timeout gets reset. Blips that > reach > > > the > > > > > > > timeout command the bot to sync themselves. Having that basic > > > > > mechanism, > > > > > > > there can be additional rules (for example, all ancestors of a > > blip > > > > > have > > > > > > to > > > > > > > be synced before the child blip is synced. stuff like that). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The timeout period could be configurable, and we can take > > existing > > > > > > > platforms are a reference. Some examples: > > > > > > > - GMail's "undo" (the atrophied uncle of Wave's "edit") used > to > > be > > > > > > > customizable from 0 to 30 seconds. Recently they increased the > > > limit > > > > to > > > > > > 60 > > > > > > > seconds. > > > > > > > - Some forums and social networks allow to choose "inmediate" > > > (zero > > > > > > > seconds) and "daily"/"weekly" (timeout-less cronjobs). > > > > > > > - Wiki software often includes a manual checkbox to > > force/prevent > > > > > > > notification messages (so either no wait, or infinite wait). > > > > > > > - IM services always operate with zero seconds. > > > > > > > - Funnily enough, I can't remember what the options were for > > > Google > > > > > > Wave. > > > > > > > I think weekly/daily/hourly? > > > > > > > - Etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, given Wave's nature, I'm inclined to think this > > should > > > > be a > > > > > > > per-wave setting (or per wave #tag, or st). There's no single > > > timeout > > > > > > that > > > > > > > will satisfy the numerous Wave use cases, so forcing the user > to > > > > choose > > > > > > one > > > > > > > (when the bot is added to the wave) miiight be a good idea. > > > > > > > Anyway, this is an endemic issue of the Wave concept: so far > > nobody > > > > has > > > > > > > come up with a way to differentiate and adapt Wave's behaviour > to > > > the > > > > > > many > > > > > > > different communication platforms it can mimic for each > specific > > > > wave. > > > > > > > Traditional communications forms differentiate themselves by > > > forcing > > > > > the > > > > > > > user to choose different clients each time (chat client vs > forum > > > URL > > > > vs > > > > > > > email software vs social network app vs...). Wave eliminates > that > > > > > barrier > > > > > > > but provides no way to build the barrier again when it's > needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Automatically detecting "too big" changes shouldn't be too > hard, > > I > > > > > > briefly > > > > > > > experimented with it this afternoon: store the plaintext > > character > > > > > count > > > > > > in > > > > > > > each blip's metadata field (the [mailllist-bot?...] string > > thingie) > > > > > when > > > > > > > the blip is synced; and don't sync again unless the count has > > > > changed X > > > > > > > percent and/or Y units. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for federation, I have no idea really. I believe that email > > > > > > > synchronization is something requested by a big percentage of > > wave > > > > > users, > > > > > > > so bundling it with wiab by default, and making it easy and > > > > > > straightfoward > > > > > > > to use, can make a lot of sense for Wave's future. Also, you > > > > eliminate > > > > > > the > > > > > > > dependency from third party servers (I bet most GoogleWave-era > > bots > > > > are > > > > > > now > > > > > > > offline...). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bruno, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This looks quite cool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main thing I am thinking is how 'big' an event has to be > > > before > > > > > > > > triggering sending an email. (A spelling correction is hardly > > > worth > > > > > > > > it) > > > > > > > > We also don't want a large sequence of emails being sent for > > > > changes > > > > > > > > happening within a few seconds of each other (think > > simultaneous > > > > > > > > editing of a large wave), so some sort of time threshold will > > > need > > > > to > > > > > > > > be considered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding federation, where should the bot be (presumably on > > the > > > > > > > > server hosting the wave)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, keep up the work on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PS. I suspect infrastructure should be able to put in a > special > > > > rule > > > > > > > > to allow this mail if we can designate some 'official' bot > > from a > > > > > > > > particular server. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 June 2013 22:48, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) < > > > > > sten...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > So I've been working on this for the past days. Still a > > > > > > > work-in-progress, > > > > > > > > > and will need at least another week of development hours > > (read: > > > > 2-4 > > > > > > > weeks > > > > > > > > > of actual time) before we can really think about migrating > to > > > > wave. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The apache mailing list is rejecting the emails from my > bot, > > it > > > > > > thinks > > > > > > > > > they're spam. So for the time being, here's a > > screenshot-based > > > > > > preview: > > > > > > > > > http://imgur.com/a/GtGY6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Saludos, > > > > > > > > > Bruno González > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > > > > > > > > > http://www.stenyak.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Saludos, > > > > > > > Bruno González > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > > > > > > > http://www.stenyak.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alain Levesque Wavewatchers > > > > > Wavyemailbeta:* > > > > > * > > > > > *Web Page <http://albonobo.com/> > > > > > * > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Saludos, > > > > Bruno González > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > > > > http://www.stenyak.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Saludos, > Bruno González > > _______________________________________________ > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > http://www.stenyak.com >
