The inherent problem with deleting waves is that unlike deleting an
email, the wave itself is shared among many users, so you're deleting
things out of other people's mailboxes when you delete a wave. I'm
not sure that I would like to allow other people to delete waves that
I've been adding
Also, wavelet.createWavelet(participants, dataDocumentCallback); in
java doesn't create a new wave, it only creates a new wavelet inside
an existing wave.
Adam Ness
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Olreich olre...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with almost everything you said. Just one quick point
instructions into the appspot datastore, and
had the Robot respond to them (potentially using polling with your
wait) solution.
I don't believe that a robot in this context would have access to any
waves though, since it wouldn't have a context to execute against.
Adam Ness
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009
that there's some kind of accountability for it, as malicious
persons would have a heyday with creating folders for the heck of it,
and Robot viruses I do not like.
On Nov 17, 10:14 am, Adam Ness adam.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, wavelet.createWavelet(participants, dataDocumentCallback); in
java doesn't
is a new instance in every wave,
though one instance should be able to play with another instance's
wave if they were to share wavelet objects via the datastore or
something.
On Nov 17, 2:54 pm, Adam Ness adam.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Digging in to the Java API, it looks like the way a robot lifecycle
I don't think Robots could ever be expected to be capable of moving
items into folders, since they're just another Participant on the
wave, and the folders belong to other participants.
Possibly a Gadget API would be a better place for this, or maybe a new
client plugin API, to allow users to
