No, not really. Javascript on client side is enough - this is how it was originally implemented in microwave by antimatter.
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ah, right. I am all for realtime, merely that I was also happy to lose > it if it meant significantly more simple implementation. > > >>"Otherwise we can use Robot > >>API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox"; > > Not keen on RobotAPI as every time I read its use it seems to need an > extra server in the chain/ > ie; > ...<>WaveServer <> Google App Engine <> client > > It should be possible with the web today to avoid that and have > clients connect directly to the wave server no? (hopefully using the > same protocol as any desktop/mobile client). > Of course, I assume you could run host both servers on the same > hardware, but still seems unnecessary to have that extra step. > > > -- > http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. > http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. > > > On 15 March 2016 at 16:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yeah, the intention is to have realtime editing. Otherwise we can use > Robot > > API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox > > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:45 PM Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Does it need to be OT aware on that scale? I thought that was only > >> needed to have fully realtime blip updating rather then a "edit + > >> submit" system. (whereupon the differences could be calculated > >> separately from the editing) > >> Is the intention then to still have realtime editing ? or is this > >> needed anyway regardless? > >> > >> I admit I only know the basics of OT and am vaguely remembering a > >> conversation about realtime blip editing adding complexity to things. > >> > >> -- > >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. > >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. > >> > >> > >> On 15 March 2016 at 16:30, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Not really. You would need to make it OT aware. and then make it > >> efficient. > >> > Lot's of effort. > >> > > >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:24 PM Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> As a side, I noticed Michael MacFadden mentioned building a rich text > >> >> editor in the browser, this much at least have been done in GWT > >> >> libraries; > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.gwtproject.org/javadoc/latest/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RichTextArea.html > >> >> > >> >> Its fairly basic, but then, I would assume to start with at least any > >> >> new wave client should stay fairly basic? > >> >> -- > >> >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. > >> >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 15 March 2016 at 15:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > Yeah, we need to re-use the existing editor. Patches would be > great! > >> >> > > >> >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM Pablo Ojanguren < > pablo...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> Hi, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I agree with the dependency hell issue and the suggestion for > >> throwing > >> >> >> away the GWT client. This would require a new client-server API as > >> >> >> suggested, however I think a Rest API won't be enough, because > real > >> >> editing > >> >> >> needs websocket. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I also agree with Michael, developing a new editor is a massive > >> task, so > >> >> >> we should use an existing one and plug it in the new API. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> To write again the server in other language would be great, but I > >> think > >> >> it > >> >> >> requires a huge effort. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I will be happy to help in decoupling the server-client, I can > >> provide > >> >> the > >> >> >> experience from my fork. And I plan to send some patches to Wave > >> soon. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> These are some slides about my fork (swellrt) it could give you > some > >> >> ideas: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WFDS_m7eyNjBjcdPs0zH496Y9bMSl0_JnSEYGjxNFn0/edit?usp=sharing > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18hMYyECo5EmQsrAb8DT6SkO7LksWVJnhdZmqeCsar4c/edit?usp=sharing > >> >> >> > >> >> >> btw, I would like to start a business providing these SwellRT > >> services. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 2016-03-14 23:27 GMT+01:00 Joseph Gentle <m...@josephg.com>: > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> I've been playing with the idea of starting a company around a > >> rewrite > >> >> of > >> >> >>> wave for years. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> -J > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 15 March 2016, Adam Bielski > <a_biel...@ymail.com.invalid > >> > > >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Hiya all!I wish I could find out who is potentially interested > in > >> >> >>> creating > >> >> >>> > the WAVE for a commercial service/productwith my seed > >> startup!Cheers! > >> >> >>> > Adam > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > 20:23 poniedziałek, 2016-3-14, Zachary Yaro < > zmy...@gmail.com > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> napisał(a): > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > I am inclined to agree with Yuri—if the alternative > >> implementation > >> >> can > >> >> >>> be > >> >> >>> > developed in parallel around the same protocol, that would seem > >> to be > >> >> >>> the > >> >> >>> > best scenario, but the existing codebase should be kept because > >> it is > >> >> >>> > (AFAIK) the most functional implementation of the protocol. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > Zachary Yaro > >> >> >>> > On Mar 14, 2016 15:05, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com > >> <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > 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 > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > 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 <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > 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 > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > 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 <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > 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 > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > > 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 <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> 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 <javascript:;>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> 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 > >> >> >>> > > > > >> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >
