Oh no not another voting round, this way we'll be working on the 1.0
spec support before this is settled ! :-)
If the general consensus is to go for #2 (which is my impression too),
lets just go with one of them otherwise it'll be a extra strain on our
resources while we should be working towards getting full 0.8 support
out there instead.
-- Chris
On Jul 15, 2008, at 7:47 PM, Gonzalo Aune wrote:
Well, i think we have to vote for something like this:
1) Leave only 'dataservice' package
2) Leave both
3) Discuss a little more about this
I say +1 for #1
G.-
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Cassie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't really support having both versions around in Shindig forever
because I think it would confuse new users deciding which one to
choose and
would be more work than its worth for this project to maintain. (2
sets of
bugs, patches, mail threads, design decisions, etc) However, anyone
can
build an OpenSocial container in whatever way they like - Shindig
is just
one impl choice (of course we hope to be the best :)
That being said, it looks like the general consensus here is moving
to
option #2 (the "dataservice" package).
Should we move forward with this? Or do we want to discuss this more?
David - do you think this accurately reflects this thread? You
stated that
you would continue working on this code. Does everyone here think
that
David
moving the code to another repository is the right choice? Or
should we go
with Ian's option and just leave both be?
Thanks for all of the comments!
- Cassie
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:47 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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
