David,
I am sorry that I didn't reply to the your message on Friday, I went
offline for a few days, just got back online today.
Firstly I should apologize, I didn't want to pass any comment on the
contribution of any part of the implementation, because I think that
both are extremely valuable, and represent many hours of thought and
work.
I also think that Abdera is a really strong framework that is ideally
suited to this type of work, especially in the Atom area, and will be
invaluable to a full blown SNS which needs to support more than just OS.
What I was trying to say, ineptly, was that I felt we needed to be
careful that any bindings inside Shindig don't prevent others already
using a version of Abdera (or any other framework) from continuing to
use it. Having options allows that to happen.
So to rephrase my original opinion, both approaches would be great
and would allow users of shindig to decide which one they wanted to
use provided
a) there is resource in the shindig community to support both, and
b) they can easily be backed off the same underlying service API's
It sounds like you are willing to do some of that work... so you get
my vote (not that I should have one for triggering such a long
thread.) #2 also gets my vote because it generates choice and has
resource prepared to work on it.
All IMHO,
Sorry everyone, I'll remember to wait to let others confirm what I am
thinking next time.
Ian
On 15 Jul 2008, at 02:46, David Primmer wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's a pretty good recent analogy for this issue, which was the
Linux
task scheduler. Two very capable implementations were developed,
but the one
that was chosen was done so because the people who worked on it
were highly
dedicated to the task.
I think the same criteria needs to be applied here. For people who
are in
favor of the 'new' code, are you willing to accept the burden of
maintenance, patches, and support? Are you going to continue doing
that even
if you change employers? for people in favor of the abdera code --
I ask the
same.
That's really what this boils down to. If both implementations get
the job
done correctly, then the decision for which one to use is simply a
matter of
determining who's going to ensure success of the component. If we
only have
one person who's going to work on one side and 10 people on the
other, then
the choice is obvious.
Another eminently reasonable point from Kevin. Although I don't think
you can always get a promise for future development in any open source
project, we do have commitments from some pretty big companies to work
on this. I really hope that the amount of contributions outside of
Google employees increases going forward in the java api server. It's
disappointingly lopsided so far, but maybe the OS Foundation will make
it safer for others to devote valuable developer hours to it. I'm
still motivated to work on an Abdera-based approach, and will probably
carry it on in some other repository. My interest has always been more
in the data portability possibilities that are appearing via AtomPub,
as well as the extensibility of the OpenSocial framework. It has a lot
of potential as a general purpose development platform and there's a
lot of cutting-edge stuff in there that will be useful to more than
just social networks.
davep
