Sounds good. Please try to redirect old URLs (e.g., like I did for http://www.waveprotocol.org/draft-protocol-specs/draft-protocol-spec) when things move around. There are a number of published papers, emails in mailing list archives, web pages such as the wikipedia articles about Google Wave and the federation protocol, etc that point to existing pages.
Soren On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:47 AM, Michael MacFadden <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > I think at least we came to an agreement that the wave protocol and > the Wave in a Box project will be treated separately (even if they are > hosted in the same project to reduce complexity for the time being). > > Given that, I was thinking that we should start organizing > waveprotocol.org such that there is a section dedicated to the > protocols and a section dedicated to Wave in a Box. At the moment > they are all intertwined. We have proposals, design documents, > roadmaps, etc for both the protocol and for the WiaB implementation. > > I think structuring this would be beneficial and help interested > parties get to the right spot. Are there any objections? > > Michael > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
