Oh, if its only the current implementation, sure if its not got value. Being merely a onlooker its been a long time since I have looked at the codebase - but would removing even a broken implementation cause any issues as regards to putting a new implementation in in the future? That is, does it serve a purpose even as a ''placeholder'' to prevent other aspects of the code being made in a way as to make federation awkward later?
-- http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. On 8 April 2016 at 00:10, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Removing the current implementation is fine, I see no problems with that, > aslong as theres enough documents to be able to recreate it from spec. > On 08/04/2016 2:22 AM, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I cannot agree more, Wave is about federation. But, the current >> implementation is broken, hard to fix and never worked fine. We need to >> think about better implementation. And there's no point to keep current >> broken implementation that can't work. >> >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:55 PM Dave Ball <w...@glark.co.uk> wrote: >> >> > I only exist in the peanut gallery, but this reflects my feelings too. >> > Wave isn't wave without federation... I wish I had the time to help :-( >> > >> > Dave >> > >> > On 07/04/16 16:42, Thomas Wrobel wrote: >> > > I'm not sure there's any point in wave without federation frankly. >> > > I supported wave because I didn't want the net turning into "facebook >> > > protocols" and "google protocols" etc. We need new emails. Protocols >> > > that allow people on different servers to communicate, not protocols >> > > trying to get everyone on the same companies server. >> > > I still fear a future of incompatibility. Of people having to be on >> > > server X because their friends are all on server X (and thus server X >> > > has no incentive to ever get better). Email is getting increasingly >> > > dated, and there's not much else federated out there even today. As >> > > the web grows into real-space applications, there will be probably >> > > even greater need for open communications standards. >> > > While the comparison of email interface wise might have harmed wave >> > > somewhat from a user expectation standpoint, I do think the same needs >> > > are there - a new federated, open, protocol to deal with today's web. >> > > - sigh - >> > > -- >> > > http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> > > http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. >> > > >> > > >> > > On 7 April 2016 at 17:25, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> Hi >> > >> Currently the federation is broken and requires a significant effort >> to >> > >> fix. Moreover, it never worked perfectly and always was a kind of >> Proof >> > Of >> > >> Concept version. I doubt we can improve the current implementation to >> be >> > >> something stable. >> > >> Therefore I suggest to remove from Wave source all code and >> dependencies >> > >> related to Federation. >> > >> Thoughts? >> > >> > >>
