On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 22:55 +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > > 2010/3/28 Ted Smith <[email protected]> > In all these discussions about what the optimal structure of > GNU Social > would be, my foremost care has been freedom. I don't yet know > what a > fully free network service would look like, but I think that > it would > have to have the following properties: > > * Based on only free software (obviously) > * Federated, so that any user can run their own node if > they wish > * NOT requiring or encouraging software as a service, or > SaaS. > * Users totally control who can see their data. > > Agree, tho I've got nothing specifically against SaaS, AGPL should > solve most issues, from what I understand. > The AGPL is effectively useless against the SaaS threat. For more info, see <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html>.
> Ive added some comments to the previous topic, and as stated, I think > the transport layer is not something that I have a strong opinion on, > but I do think the power and scalability of HTTP(S), is often > underestimated. So I think that would be a good one to look at, > perhaps in conjunction with the other suggestions . > In my system, you would just need to write a transport for HTTP/HTTPS. I think it's critical to have modular transports even if we don't go with a UI/core structure, so that we can avoid committing ourselves to one transport protocol.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
