I will be glad to collaborate :) El 20/3/2016 3:36 a. m., Evan Hughes <wisebald...@apache.org> escribió:
The cwiki seems to be best place for the time being, anyone wanting to contribute let the mailing list know for writing permissions. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/A+Wavey+Future On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 at 18:55 Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Whats the best way we can collab on a protocol spec. > > On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 at 07:05 Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As for the differences to Pie...I cant tell because there seems to be >> very little information on Pie online, nor a working copy. >> Id guess however Pie is a closed, unfederated messaging system though. >> Can previous messages be edited? is the conversation thread >> non-linear? >> The differences between a wave server/client system and a (typical) " >> fun messaging app" would be quite a lot. >> -- >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator. >> >> >> On 18 March 2016 at 18:26, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > There is at least one commercial successor - >> https://www.co-meeting.com/ >> > There was also another commercial attempt, which failed but is now open >> > sourced - https://github.com/jorkey/Wiab.pro >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:29 PM Adam Bielski >> <a_biel...@ymail.com.invalid> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Hiya all! >> >> I am new to this mailing group and I wanted to further understand the >> >> limitations OR differences that WiaB provides in comparisson to: >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/pie-computing#/entity >> >> >> >> And WHY has there not been a successor (based on the GOOGLE WAVE >> project) >> >> that has ever been launched for commercial use!? >> >> Cheers! >> >> Adam >> >> 2:29 środa, 2016-3-16, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sorry many mistakes, currently on mobile. Meant to say "the OS editors >> arnt >> >> bad but....." >> >> On 16/03/2016 11:18 AM, "Evan Hughes" <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I had a look at quill and react seperatly dismorning, interestingly >> the >> >> > atom editor is built using react and they have done at least one if >> not >> >> > more about how they get more performance out of it, moving rendering >> to >> >> the >> >> > gpu and such. >> >> > >> >> > Do you think itll actually be possible to remove ot somewhat from the >> >> > client, how do we efficently send data to the client that the >> document >> >> has >> >> > changed. >> >> > >> >> > Also we must be very careful abiut what editor we choose if we arnt >> >> > building one inhouse, debugging could destroy us all. >> >> > >> >> > But the c-rendering we could do inhouse then we would have a basis >> for >> >> > creating a c-editor from scatch. Not that the OS projects are bad but >> >> its a >> >> > pretty broad featire set we need. >> >> > On 16/03/2016 11:00 AM, "Joseph Gentle" <m...@josephg.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Sorry, just poking in here - >> >> >> >> >> >> A couple of years ago I worked with QuillJS's author to add OT to >> >> >> quill. Its a rich text editor, which emits user events and Jason >> (the >> >> >> author) has a module which interprets those events, builds >> operations >> >> >> and can do OT with them. It doesn't support rich embedding of >> >> >> components yet, but he's working on that now. >> >> >> >> >> >> React's Draft-js might also work well. >> >> >> >> >> >> -J >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Michael MacFadden >> >> >> <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > All, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > A few things on the editor. For one. I think ACE is a plain text >> >> >> editor, which I have used for a bunch of things. Has a great API >> for >> >> >> collaboration integration, but it is not rich text, which is what >> wave >> >> is >> >> >> all about. So I don’t think that will work. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Also, I think perhaps I should clarify the term editor. I >> probably >> >> >> used in inappropriately. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > There are two parts to be concerned with. The first is >> collaborative >> >> >> rendering. If you are just looking at a blip, you can still see it >> >> change >> >> >> in real time. So this would be collaborative rendering. Then when >> you >> >> are >> >> >> actively editing a blip, you need a collaborative editor. Both are >> >> >> important. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The main performance issue comes in two places. First I may have >> a >> >> >> conversation model that contains hundreds of blips. Some sort of >> lazy >> >> >> loading strategy here is probably required and smart attaching and >> >> >> detaching of listeners. If you have hundreds of blips all rendered >> at >> >> once >> >> >> and all having to have listeners attached to them because any one of >> >> them >> >> >> can change at any time you can run into rendering performance >> issues. >> >> >> Secondarily, if you do have lots of people editing lots of blips, >> much >> >> of >> >> >> that will not be “on screen” for a given user, and you don’t want >> to be >> >> >> processing all of those events and messing with the DOM if you don’t >> >> need >> >> >> to. So there are performance and complexity issues there. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Then there is the actual editor. Building a Rich Text Editor is >> not >> >> >> trivial (still.. How can this be???). So you have to deal with all >> the >> >> >> issues of building a rich text editor. Then on top of that you >> want to >> >> >> integrate remote cursors, selections, authorship, etc. into that >> editor. >> >> >> Most editors do not have that (a few do, and some are easier than >> >> others to >> >> >> add that). So there is complexity here as well. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If you want to use an open source editor you need one that does >> the >> >> >> kind of rich text editing you want to do. It needs to either have >> the >> >> >> collaboration capabilities (shared cursors, etc.) that you want, or >> it >> >> has >> >> >> to be reasonably easy to implement them yourself. And it needs to >> have >> >> a >> >> >> good enough eventing API for you to hook into it to capture local >> >> changes, >> >> >> and to have API to allow you to drive remote changes into it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The point being that, the conversation renderer and rich text >> editor >> >> is >> >> >> a very non-trivial component, if the assumption is to roughly >> replicate >> >> >> what is there. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > One point I definitely agree with is that the editor itself really >> >> >> should know nothing about OT. It should be decoupled and just >> needs to >> >> >> have a good API with good events. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ~Michael >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On 3/15/16, 10:11 AM, "Pablo Ojanguren" <pablo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>Talking about editors I suggest ace from mozilla, >> >> >> >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_%28editor%29 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>BTW, as example, this is an app we are developing on with SwellRT >> as >> >> >> >>backend: http://staging.teem.works , -it is the staging >> version, you >> >> >> can >> >> >> >>play! ;)- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>2016-03-15 17:12 GMT+01:00 Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> No, not really. Javascript on client side is enough - this is >> how it >> >> >> was >> >> >> >>> originally implemented in microwave by antimatter. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM Thomas Wrobel < >> darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > Ah, right. I am all for realtime, merely that I was also >> happy to >> >> >> lose >> >> >> >>> > it if it meant significantly more simple implementation. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >>"Otherwise we can use Robot >> >> >> >>> > >>API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox"; >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > Not keen on RobotAPI as every time I read its use it seems to >> need >> >> >> an >> >> >> >>> > extra server in the chain/ >> >> >> >>> > ie; >> >> >> >>> > ...<>WaveServer <> Google App Engine <> client >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > It should be possible with the web today to avoid that and >> have >> >> >> >>> > clients connect directly to the wave server no? (hopefully >> using >> >> the >> >> >> >>> > same protocol as any desktop/mobile client). >> >> >> >>> > Of course, I assume you could run host both servers on the >> same >> >> >> >>> > hardware, but still seems unnecessary to have that extra step. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > -- >> >> >> >>> > http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >> >>> > http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story >> >> generator. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > On 15 March 2016 at 16:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > > Yeah, the intention is to have realtime editing. Otherwise >> we >> >> can >> >> >> use >> >> >> >>> > Robot >> >> >> >>> > > API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:45 PM Thomas Wrobel < >> >> >> darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >>> > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > >> Does it need to be OT aware on that scale? I thought that >> was >> >> >> only >> >> >> >>> > >> needed to have fully realtime blip updating rather then a >> >> "edit + >> >> >> >>> > >> submit" system. (whereupon the differences could be >> calculated >> >> >> >>> > >> separately from the editing) >> >> >> >>> > >> Is the intention then to still have realtime editing ? or >> is >> >> this >> >> >> >>> > >> needed anyway regardless? >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> I admit I only know the basics of OT and am vaguely >> >> remembering a >> >> >> >>> > >> conversation about realtime blip editing adding complexity >> to >> >> >> things. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> -- >> >> >> >>> > >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >> >>> > >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story >> >> >> generator. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> On 15 March 2016 at 16:30, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> > Not really. You would need to make it OT aware. and then >> make >> >> >> it >> >> >> >>> > >> efficient. >> >> >> >>> > >> > Lot's of effort. >> >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >> >>> > >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:24 PM Thomas Wrobel < >> >> >> darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >>> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> As a side, I noticed Michael MacFadden mentioned >> building a >> >> >> rich >> >> >> >>> text >> >> >> >>> > >> >> editor in the browser, this much at least have been >> done in >> >> >> GWT >> >> >> >>> > >> >> libraries; >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.gwtproject.org/javadoc/latest/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RichTextArea.html >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> Its fairly basic, but then, I would assume to start >> with at >> >> >> least >> >> >> >>> any >> >> >> >>> > >> >> new wave client should stay fairly basic? >> >> >> >>> > >> >> -- >> >> >> >>> > >> >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad >> story >> >> >> >>> generator. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> On 15 March 2016 at 15:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> > Yeah, we need to re-use the existing editor. Patches >> would >> >> >> be >> >> >> >>> > great! >> >> >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM Pablo Ojanguren < >> >> >> >>> > pablo...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I agree with the dependency hell issue and the >> suggestion >> >> >> for >> >> >> >>> > >> throwing >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> away the GWT client. This would require a new >> >> >> client-server API >> >> >> >>> as >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> suggested, however I think a Rest API won't be >> enough, >> >> >> because >> >> >> >>> > real >> >> >> >>> > >> >> editing >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> needs websocket. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I also agree with Michael, developing a new editor >> is a >> >> >> massive >> >> >> >>> > >> task, so >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> we should use an existing one and plug it in the new >> API. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> To write again the server in other language would be >> >> >> great, but >> >> >> >>> I >> >> >> >>> > >> think >> >> >> >>> > >> >> it >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> requires a huge effort. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I will be happy to help in decoupling the >> server-client, >> >> I >> >> >> can >> >> >> >>> > >> provide >> >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> experience from my fork. And I plan to send some >> patches >> >> >> to Wave >> >> >> >>> > >> soon. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> These are some slides about my fork (swellrt) it >> could >> >> >> give you >> >> >> >>> > some >> >> >> >>> > >> >> ideas: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WFDS_m7eyNjBjcdPs0zH496Y9bMSl0_JnSEYGjxNFn0/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18hMYyECo5EmQsrAb8DT6SkO7LksWVJnhdZmqeCsar4c/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> btw, I would like to start a business providing these >> >> >> SwellRT >> >> >> >>> > >> services. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> 2016-03-14 23:27 GMT+01:00 Joseph Gentle < >> m...@josephg.com >> >> >: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> I've been playing with the idea of starting a >> company >> >> >> around a >> >> >> >>> > >> rewrite >> >> >> >>> > >> >> of >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wave for years. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> -J >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 15 March 2016, Adam Bielski >> >> >> >>> > <a_biel...@ymail.com.invalid >> >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Hiya all!I wish I could find out who is >> potentially >> >> >> >>> interested >> >> >> >>> > in >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> creating >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > the WAVE for a commercial service/productwith my >> seed >> >> >> >>> > >> startup!Cheers! >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Adam >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > 20:23 poniedziałek, 2016-3-14, Zachary Yaro < >> >> >> >>> > zmy...@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> napisał(a): >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > I am inclined to agree with Yuri—if the >> alternative >> >> >> >>> > >> implementation >> >> >> >>> > >> >> can >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> be >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > developed in parallel around the same protocol, >> that >> >> >> would >> >> >> >>> seem >> >> >> >>> > >> to be >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> the >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > best scenario, but the existing codebase should be >> >> kept >> >> >> >>> because >> >> >> >>> > >> it is >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > (AFAIK) the most functional implementation of the >> >> >> protocol. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Zachary Yaro >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > On Mar 14, 2016 15:05, "Yuri Z" < >> vega...@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> > >> <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > I think that more "wavy" projects are nice, but >> IMO >> >> it >> >> >> >>> > doesn't >> >> >> >>> > >> >> mean we >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > should abandon Apache Wave as it is now. I agree >> >> >> there are >> >> >> >>> a >> >> >> >>> > >> lot of >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > issues >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > with current code, but I think there's still >> value >> >> as >> >> >> >>> people >> >> >> >>> > can >> >> >> >>> > >> >> see >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> what >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > Wave can potentially be. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:46 AM Evan Hughes < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > The link for those who wish to join, Ill also >> add >> >> >> this >> >> >> >>> link >> >> >> >>> > >> onto >> >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > new >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > website. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > https://www.hipchat.com/gsModF8CY >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 12:12 Michael >> MacFadden < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > Yeah. Chatting is fine and beneficial. We >> just >> >> >> need to >> >> >> >>> > make >> >> >> >>> > >> >> sure >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> we >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > capture key decisions and rationale back in >> the >> >> >> list >> >> >> >>> for >> >> >> >>> > >> all to >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> see. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > ~Michael >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > On Mar 12, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Evan Hughes < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > It does not so as Ive seen other projects >> >> state >> >> >> this >> >> >> >>> > motto >> >> >> >>> > >> >> "If >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> its >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > not >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > on >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > the mailing list it didnt happen at all", >> but >> >> >> allows >> >> >> >>> > for >> >> >> >>> > >> non >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> formal >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > talk >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > and back and forth discussion realtime. >> The >> >> >> Monthly >> >> >> >>> > >> reports >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> that we >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > talked >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > about back when we did the hangout session >> >> >> should >> >> >> >>> > >> probably be >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > picked >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > up >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > again, ill add it to the monthly todo's. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 11:58 Michael >> >> MacFadden < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> One follow up question though. Does hip >> hat >> >> >> store >> >> >> >>> > >> >> conversations >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > in a >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> publicly accessible manner? If not, we >> need >> >> >> to make >> >> >> >>> > sure >> >> >> >>> > >> >> key >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > decisions >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> that come out of chats are captured and >> >> >> discussed on >> >> >> >>> > the >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> mailing >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > list >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > for >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> all to see. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> ~Michael >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 7:15 AM, Evan >> Hughes < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> I would get infra to make us a hipchat >> >> >> channel so >> >> >> >>> we >> >> >> >>> > >> have >> >> >> >>> > >> >> some >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > place >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > to >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> talk casually web interface / irc, but >> seesm >> >> >> the >> >> >> >>> > jira's >> >> >> >>> > >> >> down. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > Looking >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > to >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> getting this rolling in some way or >> another >> >> >> by mid >> >> >> >>> > week. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> ~ Evan >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:48 Evan >> Hughes < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > wisebald...@apache.org <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> The client-server protocol would >> define a >> >> >> protobuf >> >> >> >>> > and >> >> >> >>> > >> >> json >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> rest >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> services >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> so any language that support protocol >> >> buffers >> >> >> >>> would >> >> >> >>> > be >> >> >> >>> > >> >> able >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> to >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > make >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > a >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> client or fallback to the json rest. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:24 Andreas >> Kotes >> >> < >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> count-apache....@flatline.de >> <javascript:;>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> FWIW, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> I also consider the idea pretty good >> and >> >> >> would >> >> >> >>> want >> >> >> >>> > >> >> stronger >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > decoupling >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> of server/client. I'd be interested >> in a >> >> >> python >> >> >> >>> > client >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > implementation, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> mostly for CLI and bot integration. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Not sure whether doing a client-side C >> >> >> >>> > implementation >> >> >> >>> > >> of >> >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> communication protocol would be best >> here >> >> >> (so >> >> >> >>> > wrapper >> >> >> >>> > >> for >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> more >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> languages >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> can follow), or whether native Python >> >> would >> >> >> be >> >> >> >>> > >> better. We >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> need >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> something >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> for non-Java folks in any case, I >> think. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Cheers, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> count >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:52:34AM >> +1000, >> >> >> Evan >> >> >> >>> > Hughes >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> Thankyou all for your feedback and >> >> >> expressions >> >> >> >>> of >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> interests, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > seems >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> like >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> we >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> may be able to develop some teams >> >> together >> >> >> to >> >> >> >>> make >> >> >> >>> > >> this >> >> >> >>> > >> >> a >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > faster >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> reality >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> than just I. Hopefully we can get >> some >> >> more >> >> >> >>> > people to >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> express >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> interests >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> in >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> this way forward. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> -- >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Andreas 'count' Kotes >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Taming computers for humans since >> 1990. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask >> what >> >> >> makes >> >> >> >>> you >> >> >> >>> > >> come >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> alive, >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > and >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > go >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> do >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> it. >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Because what the world needs is >> people who >> >> >> have >> >> >> >>> > come >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> alive." -- >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > Howard >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Thurman >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >
