i think the most usefull reason to move to github, is that one of the only active coders feels like doing it .. hence we should support that person :)
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > "But for > that commitment, we need more consensus about what Wave should try to be " > > Is there really a lack of consensus here? > I think , imho, we have a consensus, just not the skill/time. > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 2 December 2013 16:51, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Christian, > > > > Although I support the incubator's goals, it seems that there is > probably a > > fundamental mismatch between the state of Apache Wave and where and how > > Wave needs to develop. > > > > I am one of the people who had to stand back from Wave a while back. I > was > > enthusiastic about the possibility of Apache acting as a strong framework > > for Wave, but it seems that it's at the wrong stage of development to > > benefit from everything that Apache offers. I must also admit that the > new > > Gmail inbox doesn't draw me to forum posts as much as it used to. The > > community tools of Apache aren't getting my attention, for whatever > reason. > > > > Wave is trying to define lots of new bits of technology that don't > > necessarily have a fixed architecture yet or even a place in other fixed > > architectures. Months later, we're still at a point where we have a body > of > > code that's still largely a specific user client rather than an agile > > development platform that can enable a wide variety of apps via a common > > set of communications and data management protocols and standards. Most > > importantly from my own perspective, it's not moved significantly towards > > an architecture that could be strongly mobile first with both synchronous > > and asynchronous publishing. So for me, it's not meeting the goals of > what > > Wave 3.0 could be. At the same time you have initiatives like Motorola's > > Project Ara for open source mobile hardware development that would be > ideal > > for some of the things that Wave could do in developing nations, as well > as > > open source mobile OS initiatives, so open and mobile as a combination > are > > progressing. > > > > I wish that I were still an active coder (sometimes), but I am not, and I > > am not going to be able to reach my goals without committed coders. But > for > > that commitment, we need more consensus about what Wave should try to be > in > > an increasingly crowded market for collaborative services. From that > > perspective, Wave seems to need a bit more direction than the Apache > > framework can manage at this point. There's not a body of code that > meets a > > well defined market objective - that's a profile for success in Apache, > it > > seems, looking at some of the other projects. Open or not, every platform > > must find a need and fill it. > > > > Finally, since commitment seems to be partially a factor of funding, > > perhaps a more independent project on Github (assuming that there are no > > remnant Google claims) might make it easier for independent teams to > > attract funding via crowdsourcing platforms once a more concrete goal has > > been defined. Once such a project met with some initial success, perhaps > > there could be a body of code that could be nurtured in the Apache > > framework at a later time. > > > > I am sorry to have dropped out of this loop, but I have had to focus on > > money-generating opportunities more intently, if I could balance that > with > > Wave a bit more easily then it would be easier to focus, no doubt. But > life > > goes on, and I know that Wave will always go on. If there are team > members > > who feel that I can contribute positively in this transition, feel free > to > > stay in touch. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > John Blossom > > > > email: jblos...@gmail.com > > phone: 203.293.8511 > > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier < > grobme...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > it seems as the first steam with the new people is gone. > > > > > > I believe it makes sense to discuss if the incubator is the right > place. > > > Incubation has a specific goal: forming a team which can do releases > and > > > is - in a way - active. > > > > > > I see there is little activity at all. The only person i have seen > > working > > > on the codebase recently was Ali. > > > He also was the release manager of package which had trouble to receive > > > the necessary votes from its own team. > > > > > > My hope was this would change in the past months. But today I have only > > > little hope. > > > > > > Playing the devils advocate I ask you (again): > > > > > > Do you folks believe the incubator can ever be completed as it is now? > > > > > > If you believe yes, please let me know why or how we can achieve that > > goal. > > > > > > Otherwise my recommendation is to move Wave to GitHub and close the > > > incubation until the community around Wave has grown. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Christian > > > > > > > > > --- > > > http://www.grobmeier.de > > > @grobmeier > > > GPG: 0xA5CC90DB > > > > > >
