I think that more "wavy" projects are nice, but IMO it doesn't mean we should abandon Apache Wave as it is now. I agree there are a lot of issues with current code, but I think there's still value as people can see what Wave can potentially be.
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:46 AM Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> wrote: > The link for those who wish to join, Ill also add this link onto the new > website. > > https://www.hipchat.com/gsModF8CY > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 12:12 Michael MacFadden < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Yeah. Chatting is fine and beneficial. We just need to make sure we > > capture key decisions and rationale back in the list for all to see. > > > > ~Michael > > > > > On Mar 12, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > It does not so as Ive seen other projects state this motto "If its not > on > > > the mailing list it didnt happen at all", but allows for non formal > talk > > > and back and forth discussion realtime. The Monthly reports that we > > talked > > > about back when we did the hangout session should probably be picked up > > > again, ill add it to the monthly todo's. > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 11:58 Michael MacFadden < > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> One follow up question though. Does hip hat store conversations in a > > >> publicly accessible manner? If not, we need to make sure key > decisions > > >> that come out of chats are captured and discussed on the mailing list > > for > > >> all to see. > > >> > > >> ~Michael > > >> > > >>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 7:15 AM, Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> I would get infra to make us a hipchat channel so we have some place > to > > >>> talk casually web interface / irc, but seesm the jira's down. Looking > > to > > >>> getting this rolling in some way or another by mid week. > > >>> > > >>> ~ Evan > > >>> > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:48 Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> The client-server protocol would define a protobuf and json rest > > >> services > > >>>> so any language that support protocol buffers would be able to make > a > > >>>> client or fallback to the json rest. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:24 Andreas Kotes < > > >> count-apache....@flatline.de> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> FWIW, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I also consider the idea pretty good and would want stronger > > decoupling > > >>>>> of server/client. I'd be interested in a python client > > implementation, > > >>>>> mostly for CLI and bot integration. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Not sure whether doing a client-side C implementation of the > > >>>>> communication protocol would be best here (so wrapper for more > > >> languages > > >>>>> can follow), or whether native Python would be better. We need > > >> something > > >>>>> for non-Java folks in any case, I think. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> count > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:52:34AM +1000, Evan Hughes wrote: > > >>>>>> 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. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Andreas 'count' Kotes > > >>>>> Taming computers for humans since 1990. > > >>>>> "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and > > go > > >> do > > >>>>> it. > > >>>>> Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." -- > > Howard > > >>>>> Thurman > > >> > > >
