On Sat, 2007-02-03 at 04:24 -0500, Ivan Krstić wrote: > Joshua N Pritikin wrote: > > Anyway, I was thinking about collaboration. I understand that at least > > Abiword and TamTam have plans and maybe implementations for activity > > specific collaboration. That's great. What I am worried about is apps > > which are not tailored for Sugar. Is Sugar going to provide some sort of > > fallback generic collaboration facilities? > > I believe the plan is to provide not only fallback collaboration > facilities, but recommended ones. Abi will need to move to use the Sugar > presence service, and then do its raw communication over Jabber (the > AbiCollab design supports this already). This lets us do the right thing > when you're on the mesh and when you e.g. come in range of the school > server, or just connect to the net from somewhere.
Why not default to plain TCP if possible? It's a lot less resource heavy than XMPP. As for integrating with buddies connected to some school server over XMPP while you are doing some collaboration over TCP already: abiword will be able to set up collaboration sessions of people using different transports just fine. > My understanding is that there are two APIs in question here: one is > lower-level, whereby after interfacing with the presence service, you > can go on the wire and speak Jabber directly to implement your > collaboration logic, and another is a higher-level API which lets new > activities use Sugar collaboration primitives without having to roll > their own. Dan and Marco can correct me if I misunderstood this. Sounds good to me. We will use the first, low level API. Marc _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
