Hi, It sounds like the school server should be the node server.
Does this proposed implementation support python sugar activities? Tony On 03/09/2014 07:32 AM, sugar-devel-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org wrote:
Message: 4 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:12:56 +0100 From: Daniel Narvaez<dwnarv...@gmail.com> To: Prasoon Shukla<prasoon92.i...@gmail.com> Cc: Sugar-dev Devel<sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org>, Sam Parkinson <sam.parkins...@gmail.com>, Emil Dudev<emildu...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] Regarding JS collaboration project Message-ID: <canthhva+df2ihcgof2l5qmbo3xhfsuuxuukhgfyhtqovhw4...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" If I remember correctly Emil also agreed that the new framework should be independent from telepathy at some point and even worked on it. On 9 March 2014 06:45, Prasoon Shukla<prasoon92.i...@gmail.com> wrote:>Hi Sam. Sorry for the late response but I was occupied with academics. > >Anyway, I need to bother you again with some questions. > >So, I went through the thread by Emil Dudev and read the arguments he made >in favour of not using the mozilla node server and using telepathy instead. >To that, dnarvaez said that using the node server might be a better idea >since the current protocol is very unstable. > >Now, I am somewhat familiar with sugar codebase but certainly not enough >to actually discuss the merits or demerits of either of these approaches >(although personally, I like better the idea of all communication happening >over websocket via a node server). So, the final decision on which approach >to take will be in the hands of those more experienced. But as I said >before, I would prefer it if we use the websocket protocol to have this >kind of architecture: > >|Sugar Web Activity| <----->|Sugar Shell| > \ > \ > websocket > \ >|Node Server| > / > / > / >|Sugar Web Activity| <----->|Sugar Shell| > >instead of the usual telepathy based communication. This I would like >because: >1. We'll be able to use the mozilla server with modifications as needed. >2. We'll be able to use the*huge* node.js ecosystem for realtime >communication in any way we want! And, websocket is very versatile - we >can send pretty much any binary data over the network. > >Also, I've worked with node before and found the communication to be quite >reliable (which it is not with the current XMPP based protocol, if I >understood dnarvaez correctly). That said, I've only tested out my node >based work with a handful of people, so... > >The only downside is the need to have a node server running. For the case >when there is not internet connectivity, I think we can make a set of >scripts that can be called to run a node server on the one of the machines, >say that of the teacher, and all others will connect to it. And of course, >this process needs to be simple. > >Anyway, it just seems right to me to augment JS activities with a JS based >collaboration framework. But of course, I don't really know the details all >too well to be making the decision here. > >So, can you please comment on this? Once this decision is made, I can >start working on my application. > >Thanks
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
