Well.. I think it is too early on in the open source process to create a fork. However, this is part of the nature of being open source, certain people don't agree with an idea and they wish to create something they directly have control over. I do agree with what has been said here, HTTP has only been discussed as an alternative to XMPP and is not even implemented in the current tip yet (as far as I am aware at least).
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:04 PM, James Purser <[email protected]>wrote: > MIght be an idea for someone to post a response on the blog. Just to > clarify > a couple of items > > James > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Torben Weis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > How ridiculous. > > > > Torben > > > > 2011/1/27 James Purser <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.process-one.net/en/blogs/article/xwave_a_tribute_to_google_wave_team/ > > > > > > So it appears that processOne is setting themselves up as an > alternative > > > reference implementation based on the fact that they don't like the > work > > > being done on the http version of the protocol. > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > --------------------------- > > Prof. Torben Weis > > Universitaet Duisburg-Essen > > [email protected] > > > -- --Matt
