Ah, so your not planning to write the server in Java anymore? your starting from complete scratch? fair enough then - that does lose one of the main plus points of GWT indeed. (although, regarding Scala; That is basically Java in terms of sharing). If its javascript each side though, yes, that would make sense as then you can share.
Whatever you choose should, at the very least; - Be browser natural. - Minify code as much as possible for deployment. - Use imagestrips and inline DataURLs for all image resources. - If possible, try to load only whats needed for that specific user. (ie, code defering) To me, writing in raw javascript just gets you a load more unnecessary work you have to manually do. This isnt a pro-gwt thing at my end, more of a "effort shouldn't be expanded for already solved problems" ;) I am sorry to say there is still a lot of differences between the browsers. Microsoft catching up a bit helped, but if your working on any decent sized app, your going to end up with browser specific code. Newish technology's like offline storage, websockets, and even basic CORs issues have differences. Hell, even the way browsers handle paste operations can be different at times ;) ~~~ Thomas & Bertines online review show: http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) On 1 December 2013 19:07, Zachary Yaro <zmy...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Thomas, if you like Java and GWT, you are in luck because there is already > a wave project using those (I refer, of course, to WIAB). I think having > Joseph's project be done in pure JavaScript (and I do prefer writing my JS > directly rather than using another language that “compiles” into JS) is a > great idea because it gives those of us who do *not* prefer Java a bigger > way to contribute to the wave ecosystem. > > > —Zachary Yaro > > > On 1 December 2013 06:47, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > " I still want a web client, but it should be > > written in pure javascript." > > > > GWT is already pure javascript. Writing "Directly" rather then via Java > > doesn't give any real advantages in the end result - it just means you > rule > > out code sharing between client and server, an give yourself more work in > > terms of writing around browser differences and having to optimize for > the > > web. There's things other then GWT that can do that, but raw javascript > > just adds a tone more work to web client development. > > > > That said, I pretty much agree with everything else. > > I would suggest, however, you need a few people ready to work on specific > > goals for a specific amount. And what can be achieved is kept very clear. > > Unfortunately no one will understand a kickstarter talking about OT. (or, > > not enough to get the money I think). It all needs to be put into real > > terms. > > Multiple clients and use's with a single federate realtime protocol is > > still a very big deal - no one has experience of that at the moment. The > > hard part is getting across all the use-case's for it. Or, rather, the > > specific ones you plan to make possible with the kickstarter. > > > > For my part, I am happy again to contribute (for free) whenever there is > a > > separation of the GWT client. Or even a clean client/server protocol to > > build a new web client from stretch. > > > > Additionally, I have an Augmented Reality specific client application I > > wrote, coded for Android phones. The idea was anyone could annotate > > anything anywhere, and share it with whoever they want. The app is > working > > (mostly)...except it has no sever to connect too. Nothing at the moment > > forfills the requirement. Once theres a client/server protocol to a wave > > server I could very quickly put out this (imho) rather cool Android > client > > and I think it will attack a fair bit of attention. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~ > > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > > > > On 1 December 2013 06:09, Angus Turner <ad...@theangus.org> wrote: > > > > > That's actually a really good idea. Id be happy to help out with > > > organising. > > > > > > It sounds perfect for Wave, as there's tonnes of interest but not much > > > programming ability. > > > > > > I would be interested in helping out with the actual programming but my > > > expertise is in python not Java. > > > > > > On Sunday, 1 December 2013, Joseph Gentle wrote: > > > > > > > I still really want to make the wave platform we've been talking > about > > > > for awhile. I just don't have any time because I need to work to eat. > > > > > > > > So I've spent the last month thinking about running a kickstarter to > > > > fund the work. Christian's email was really timely. > > > > > > > > > > > > I want arbitrary JSON documents, or arbitrary embedding like we > talked > > > > about a few months ago. > > > > > > > > I want a protocol based on real P2P algorithms rather than the hacky > > > > mess we have at the moment with trees of servers connecting via an > > > > XMPP extension > > > > > > > > I want the same fundamental protocol to work server-server or > > > > server-client. The OT stuff should work like git. > > > > > > > > No single person can maintain our 500k of legacy java code. I want to > > > > write a better version with much cleaner separation of OT protocol > and > > > > application specifics. I still want a web client, but it should be > > > > written in pure javascript. > > > > > > > > Messages should be cryptographically secure from snooping. > > > > > > > > > > > > The way I see it, there's fundamentally three pieces that make up > wave: > > > > > > > > 1. A set of OT primitives which allow peers to generate & interpret > > > > operations > > > > 2. A platform on top of (1) for exchanging operations between > networked > > > > peers > > > > 3. An application on top of (2) which is trying to replace email > > > > > > > > These pieces should be separate from one another, and usable in other > > > > contexts. > > > > > > > > I have a clear idea of how we can make (1) and (2) work. The OT part > > > > we've talked about on the list and I've been slowly prototyping out > > > > here: http://github.com/josephg/tp2stuff > > > > > > > > I have a bunch of applications I want to build on top of a platform > > > > like this. For example, I want my text editor, compiler & unit tests > > > > to all talk to one another so my text editor doesn't need > > > > language-specific completion or syntax checking, and so my friends > can > > > > jump in and help me code. > > > > > > > > I don't know what the best way to build (3) is - but I'm more than > > > > happy to build the platform that a new kind of email could be built > on > > > > top of. Maybe the current WIAB design is totally fine for that part - > > > > though I want end-to-end encryption. > > > > > > > > I don't know when the right time to do this would be. I don't know if > > > > I should work alone or if we should put a team together (Hi Ali!). If > > > > I were to do this properly it would take about a month of prep to get > > > > a kickstarter together, and if it is successful I'd want to quit my > > > > job to do it. I think it'd take me about 6 months to a year of work > to > > > > get a stable, secure platform working (probably closer to a year), > and > > > > I'm also not allowed to stay in the US without an employer on my > visa. > > > > > > > > The earliest this will probably happen is the end of the year. > > > > > > > > Kickstarter might also not be the right way to fund it. Cryptocat was > > > > funded in 2012 mostly by Radio Free Asia's Open Tech Fund[1] to the > > > > tune of ~$100k. A kickstarter would give us users (great) and > > > > publicity, but the right private sponsor might also work. > > > > > > > > Maybe the most contentious part of all, I don't think I'd want to > call > > > > it wave. But it really would be the grandchild of what we've been > > > > working on all this time. > > > > > > > > Thats my thoughts. If anyone has any ideas, I'm all ears. As I say, > > > > I'm keen to build this, but I'm too old to live on ramen in a granny > > > > shack. This thing we've been working toward has real value, and could > > > > be put to great effect if we can actually make it good. > > > > > > > > -J > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://crypto.cat/documents/report-1213.pdf > > > > https://www.opentechfund.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks > > > Angus Turner > > > e: h...@theangus.org > > > m: 0424972516 > > > > > >
