I'll just sadly from my little lurker corner repeat what I have been saying for 3 years or so now; I wanted to work on a client, despite trying, I lacked the ability to understand the server side code.
There was never a clear separation of client and sever that I feel would have allowed less skilled coders like me to contribute. I was frustrated when I saw GWT/ GUI issues on the web client being posted at times to fix...and I could have helped with that. But I couldn't, because the bureaucracy of having the sever and client tied together made (for me) trivial things rather hard. My half-developed phone client remained dead since Googles time as well because I couldn't figure out how to interface with the changes made to how you should talk to the sever. I had at one point 3 people helping me on that project, and with a client/sever protocol we could have all contributed. Ideally two projects and a documented protocol would have been best. Much like how email severs and clients can be developed separately, and standards like pop3 and imap used to talk between them. I fully acknowledge much of this is my own lack of skills, and with everyone unpaid volunteers I cant expect anything. But this is my hypothesis as to why Wave development wasn't as active as it could have been. -Thomas Wrobel arwave.org ~~~ Thomas & Bertines online review show: http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) On 14 March 2015 at 21:52, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > Wave has been incubating for some years now, and, unfortunately, has not > shown a level of growth that, in my opinion, would suggest that it is > likely to reach graduation from the Incubator. > > Unfortunately, I think it is time we accept that Wave is unlikely to > reach graduation, and should retire. > > To explain what this means - as I understand it, the ASF repo would be > marked read-only, and after a period of time, the lists disabled. > > The code would, however, remain open-source, and any person, or group of > people would be free to fork the code and continue with it elsewhere, > e.g. Github/Sourceforge/etc. > > In the end, this is a decision of the Incubator PMC, however I’d like to > see whether anyone here has any thoughts to add before I put this to the > wider Incubator community. > > Upayavira > > P.S. This came up on the incubator-general list as a part of a > discussion on the Wave report >
