In defence of the team, it always takes awhile to figure out what the best way to modularize a software project is when you're implementing a new idea. The right abstractions always seem obvious in retrospect, but until you've thought about it a lot its not obvious at all. For example, moving from apache+cgi_bin -> apache+mod_php -> python+wsgi / ruby+rack -> ruby+sinatra / nodejs took _years_ of iteration.
-J On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Assuming the protocol still maintains waves ability's; > *open > *federated > *selective sharing (that is, sharing X with just a few people) > *realtime > Wave should be the name given to the server to server protocol, imho, but > not much else. > Google made the mistake of calling everything wave. The server to server > protocol, the client and the conversation thread in the client. That was > just silly really. > > Ideally anything developed should maintain server to server compatibility > with Apaches. But, at this point, if this project takes off better then it > would be upto Apache's java server to adapt to this ones. > > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 2 December 2013 20:30, Patrick Coleman <patcole...@google.com> wrote: > >> The proposal seems to include rewriting the OT stack, changing the >> language(s) the client and server are written in, and moving to github. >> If this is the case, is there any point in still being called Wave? >> >> It sounds like not much will be able to be transferred other than >> knowledge, >> so is there any reason to not just create a kickstarter for GentleWare (or >> whatever you want to call it :p)? >> I guess it is still a wave-y project, but this is kind of like the >> Theseus's paradox of project naming. >> >> (although I'm not that familiar with licensing concerns, so maybe there's >> part of the federation protocol or the OT spec which >> can only be used by 'Wave' in which case it makes sense). >>
