Thankyou all for your feedback and expressions of interests, seems like we may be able to develop some teams together to make this a faster reality than just I. Hopefully we can get some more people to express interests in this way forward. On 11/03/2016 9:57 AM, "Jonathan Leong" <jon.le...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys, > > This paragraph caught my eye: > > Currently with the project patches and issues aren't given enough attention > > due to the lack of manpower. However actions can be taken to smooth this > > process as listed below > > > I'm not a developer, but perhaps I can help out in this area? I've done > some DevOps/Automation work with Chef and Jenkins. > > PS. Long time lurker, but big fan of Wave. > > > -Jonathan Leong > > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Michael MacFadden < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Something that got lost in that translation was, if we were going to go > > down the path you are considering, I would be interested in the OT > > subsystem and the protocol. The main reason I have not been contributing > > much is simply because we aren’t doing much in those areas. > > > > > > > > > > On 3/10/16, 6:37 PM, "Michael MacFadden" <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > >Looking over the doc is a good start, I think we could codify some > > additional things or principles that we would want to account for. > > > > > >Personally, my expertise lies in the OT system and the client to server > > messaging. Both in the implementation and in the “why/how” of what is > > there now. > > > > > >One thing I would say is that the Client’s data model / rendering > > approach is fairly sophisticated in two regards. First building any sort > > of rich text editor in the browser is some what difficult. I am not sure > > that undertaking that particular effort, GWT or otherwise is going to be > > easy. The rest of the UI could be easily redone quickly, but the editor > > would take months and months to do from scratch. I think we would want > to > > consider if we should be looking at using an existing editor that is out > > there. > > > > > >The other area where the UI is complex is in the performance aspect of > > it. The wave UI is designed to load a ton of “blips”. The content over > > time could become very, very long. There was some measure of thought put > > into the current system to make rendering and eventing very fast to > handle > > large conversations. > > > > > >Just a few thoughts. > > > > > >~Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 3/10/16, 4:34 PM, "Thomas Wrobel" <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >>As always +1 to separation (speaking as a GWT person not having a clue > > >>how the server works). > > >>-- > > >>http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. > > >>http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. > > >> > > >> > > >>On 10 March 2016 at 14:32, Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>> Hell all, > > >>> > > >>> please see the attached document for my own personal vision for the > > future > > >>> of wave, > > >>> > > >>> > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YnhcupFtReZyq5Y5QheIbYFO2epEhXGucNZE04r_oA4/edit?usp=sharing > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Happy to receive any thoughts on any of the changes. > > >>> > > >>> Sincerely, > > >>> Evan Hughes > > > > > > > >
