So a couple of my thoughts on this thread.  Apache Foundation is great
provided Google wants to release control of code.  If they do not, I
like the idea of the consortium because it is a formal construct that
can facilitate the pooling of resources, a consensus of
recommendations, and can support sub groups that take on different
aspects of the effort.  Also, a consortium promotes more participation
outside of developers and can be focused more on common protocols
(whether it's for federation, OT, etc).  As Ian from Novell mentioned
they were creating a collaboration platform before Wave and they are
interested in federation (but not necessarily just focusing on the
Wave code base).  A consortium may be a more natural fit for external
organizations in this mold.

I'm not sure what federation looks like without OT.  I want to hear
more on this.  When I think of OT, I think less real-time and more the
ability to guarantee convergence between multiple participants on a
shared state via operations.  As Patrick Nagel pointed out, sending
around substantive copies of documents seems close to a source control
system.  So I am very interested in understanding how a non-OT
collaborative federation would work.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave 
Protocol" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.

Reply via email to