Hi Brett, On 2010-08-07 07:13 UTC Brett Morgan wrote: > OT and version control systems serve very different masters. By that I mean > you wouldn't want to use the merge system of version control systems for > Wave, just as you would not want to use OT for managing source code > history. > > The reason is simple, to steal a line from one of the Wave team, OT is too > good. OT's merge never fails. > > In version control systems you, as a user, rely on the merge failing to > highlight areas that need human intervention. In wave we don't want humans > to have to constantly be involved in handling the real time merge of the > disparate change streams.
I'm aware of that. I was answering Ian's statements "My concern is that WFP is tightly coupled with OT, and OT is complex.", which seems to imply that something without OT could be more successful, at least as a first step. And then later he writes "I wonder whether a slightly different protocol [...] would be received better by the community. [...] one that would allow services to federate any type of content.", which seems to also be covered by VCS, as far as I can tell. I didn't really think this whole thing through, and maybe the required manual merging vs. OT in WFP makes it not workable for a communication/collaboration platform - but then so would any other implementation without OT, no? Patrick. -- Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
