I agree wholeheartedly that the entire Apache Wave community should be excited about participating, and I assume that everyone on the list is seeing this and should want to join in. If we have to reschedule, no biggie, we're at square zero and it's more about getting people on board and brainstorming. If you've been invited already, then invite others who you think should be excited. To that end, here's the link to the event:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JohnBlossom/posts/KTB6EkxB99q If you're an Apache Wave committer and you miss the event, then you'll be able to view it via YouTube via a link that I'll post here. I do want to start accelerating communications more in the community, but this is a busy week. Best Regards, John Blossom President Shore Communications Inc. where content, technology and people meet. (Salesmark of Shore Communications Inc.) web: shore.com blog: contentblogger.com email: jblos...@shore.com phone: 203.293.8511 fax: 203.663.8259 twitter: jblossom <https://twitter.com/jblossom> google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom LinkedIn: John Blossom <http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnblossom> facebook: John Blossom skype: jblossom On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't want to delay this thing, but are there really no other people who > are interested in this? I think we should really try to reach out > personally to some other folks to see if we can attract them in. > > ~Michael > > On 7/23/13 7:00 AM, "John Blossom" <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >1200 ET, btw - bad math. > > > >All the best, > > > >John Blossom > > > >email: jblos...@gmail.com > >phone: 203.293.8511 > >google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > > > > > >On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:53 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> OK, the consensus time/date for the hangout seems to be Wednesday, 31 > >> July, 1600 UTC (1000 EDT). I will create and event later today in > >>Hangouts. > >> If you're on the wave-dev list and have a Google login, please forward > >>me > >> your email ID/Google+ ID privately and I will add you to the circle of > >> invitees. I Have Joseph's ID already and I believe Ali and Michael also, > >> but if you have a doubt, just send it along. If you don't make the > >>hangout > >> itself, I will be sure to share the link here for the common record. > >> > >> All the best, > >> > >> John Blossom > >> > >> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >> phone: 203.293.8511 > >> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:06 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> > >>wrote: > >> > >>> Ali, > >>> > >>> New tool for me, but worth a try. Here's the Doodle link: > >>> http://doodle.com/5z7usamgh7kee4gf > >>> > >>> I am open to other times, but these seem to be the most logical. Please > >>> remember that UTC at this time of year is one hour less ahead from the > >>>U.S. > >>> time zones due to Daylight Savings Time - e.g., ET is UTC+4 right now. > >>> > >>> All the best, > >>> > >>> John Blossom > >>> > >>> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>> phone: 203.293.8511 > >>> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I agree that another hangout sounds fun. > >>>> > >>>> John, how about setting up a Doodle for us to mark some dates on? > >>>> (http://doodle.com/) > >>>> > >>>> Ali > >>>> > >>>> On 17 July 2013 15:33, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > Great, Michael, find a date that works for you that seems to match > >>>>with > >>>> > others' interests and I will be glad to arrange for this. We can > >>>>have > >>>> the > >>>> > link available but not make public, if that helps to encourage > >>>> constructive > >>>> > participation. > >>>> > > >>>> > All the best, > >>>> > > >>>> > John Blossom > >>>> > > >>>> > email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>> > phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>> > google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Michael MacFadden < > >>>> > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >> I am definitely interested. I will check my schedule for next > >>>>week. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> ~Michael > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On 7/16/13 11:02 AM, "John Blossom" <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> >That was my thought, also. ApacheWavers, please respond with some > >>>> avails > >>>> >> >calibrated to UT+1 for this week and next week. Time to get this > >>>> party > >>>> >> >started! My L,A. project is waiting for the funder to come > >>>>through, > >>>> but my > >>>> >> >Nkommo project is gaining steam - hopeful that we'll have some > >>>> exciting > >>>> >> >announcements fairly soon. Time to change the world with Wave!!! > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >All the best, > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >John Blossom > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >email: jblos...@gmail.com > >>>> >> >phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>> >> >google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com > > > >>>> wrote: > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >> I've had a busy few weeks - gearing up to launch our product at > >>>> work. > >>>> >> >> We should organize another hangout sometime. > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> -J > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 7:24 AM, John Blossom - Shore > >>>> Communications > >>>> >> >> Inc. <jblos...@shore.com> wrote: > >>>> >> >> > Soo...how is this initiative going? How may I help to move it > >>>> forward? > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > Best Regards, > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > John Blossom > >>>> >> >> > President > >>>> >> >> > Shore Communications Inc. > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > where content, technology and people meet. (Salesmark of Shore > >>>> >> >> > Communications Inc.) > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > web: shore.com > >>>> >> >> > blog: contentblogger.com > >>>> >> >> > email: jblos...@shore.com > >>>> >> >> > phone: 203.293.8511 > >>>> >> >> > fax: 203.663.8259 > >>>> >> >> > twitter: jblossom <https://twitter.com/jblossom> > >>>> >> >> > google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom > >>>> >> >> > LinkedIn: John Blossom > >>>><http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnblossom> > >>>> >> >> > facebook: John Blossom > >>>> >> >> > skype: jblossom > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM, John Blossom > >>>><jblos...@gmail.com > >>>> > > >>>> >> >>wrote: > >>>> >> >> > > >>>> >> >> >> Ingenious, Torben, certainly adds efficiency. John > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Torben Weis < > >>>> torben.w...@gmail.com> > >>>> >> >> wrote: > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >>> 2013/6/25 Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> > > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> When peers connect, they send each other missing ops. > >>>> Figuring > >>>> >> >>out > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> which ops are missing can be surprisingly tricky - but > >>>> we'll > >>>> >> >> figure > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> that out later. New ops must be ingested in order, so > >>>>we > >>>> always > >>>> >> >> >>> ingest > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> an operation after ingesting all of its parents. > >>>> >> >> >>> > > >>>> >> >> >>> > Just use a Merkle Tree that is at the same time a prefix > >>>> tree with > >>>> >> >> >>> respect > >>>> >> >> >>> to the hashes of the ops (explanation below). > >>>> >> >> >>> The bandwidth usage is O(1) if both clients are in sync and > >>>> O(log > >>>> >> >>n) if > >>>> >> >> >>> they have one or few different ops and O(n) in the worst > >>>>case, > >>>> >> >>where n > >>>> >> >> in > >>>> >> >> >>> the number of ops. > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> Constructing the tree is simple. > >>>> >> >> >>> Let the hash function output 20 bytes and let's encode this > >>>>in > >>>> hex. > >>>> >> >> This > >>>> >> >> >>> results in a hash-string of 40 hex-characters for each > >>>> operation. > >>>> >> >> >>> Each node hashes over the hashes of its children. Leaf-nodes > >>>> >> >> correspond to > >>>> >> >> >>> operations and thus use the hash value of their respective > >>>> >> >>operation. > >>>> >> >> >>> The tree-invariant is that all siblings on level x share the > >>>> same > >>>> >> >> prefix > >>>> >> >> >>> of > >>>> >> >> >>> x hex-characters. > >>>> >> >> >>> The tree is not sent over the network. Instead, clients > >>>>start > >>>> >> >>comparing > >>>> >> >> >>> the > >>>> >> >> >>> hashes at the root. > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> Two clients compare their root hash. If it is equal, the > >>>>entire > >>>> >> >>tree is > >>>> >> >> >>> equal and therefore they are in sync. > >>>> >> >> >>> If not, they download all direct children and repeat the > >>>> procedure > >>>> >> >>for > >>>> >> >> >>> each > >>>> >> >> >>> sub-tree rooted by one of these children. > >>>> >> >> >>> For example, if child number 3 has a different hash, but all > >>>> others > >>>> >> >> share > >>>> >> >> >>> the same hash, then we have learned that there are one or > >>>>more > >>>> ops > >>>> >> >> with a > >>>> >> >> >>> hash of 3xxxx... that are different and need syncing. > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> Typically we can limit the depth of the tree to few levels. > >>>>8 > >>>> levels > >>>> >> >> >>> already yield a tree that could store 16^8 possible ops. So > >>>>in > >>>> the > >>>> >> >> worst > >>>> >> >> >>> case two clients need to wait for 8 round-trips to > >>>>determine a > >>>> >> >>missing > >>>> >> >> op. > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> In addition, each client sends a time stamp. So when > >>>>syncing we > >>>> >> >>report > >>>> >> >> the > >>>> >> >> >>> last time stamp received from this client and ask for all > >>>>ops > >>>> this > >>>> >> >> client > >>>> >> >> >>> received later. If these are few, then simply get them (even > >>>> if we > >>>> >> >>know > >>>> >> >> >>> some of the ops already, because we got them from another > >>>> client). > >>>> >> >>If > >>>> >> >> >>> there > >>>> >> >> >>> are too many ops, fall back to the merkle tree. With a good > >>>> >> >> approximation > >>>> >> >> >>> of RTT and bandwidth, it is easy to calculate which > >>>>algorithm > >>>> is the > >>>> >> >> best > >>>> >> >> >>> to sync two clients. > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >>> Greetings > >>>> >> >> >>> Torben > >>>> >> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > >
