On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 11:10 +0200, Sylvan Heuser wrote: > I've finally caught up with the mass of emails from the weekend... :-) > > So, personally, I would favor Carlo's approach. I like having perfect > technologies, and I agree that they have social implications. > But obviously we can't direct all our efforts in that direction. > So why don't we think about a future-proof design, but apply it to the > quick PHP hack Blaine&Matt want to see? > > I think we can handle this by abstracting the transport layer like Ted > said - and focus on the HTTP module first. > If the abstraction is "abstract" enough, we can think about implementing > our own PSYCish protocol later, but would still be able to have quick > results in PHP. This would probably even play well with an Elgg fork, > depending on how they did it. >
It would also be good to have a clear distinction between the core (the program that communicates between nodes, forwards communications, publishes data, etc.) and the UI. If we have that, we can write a GLAMP core and GLAMP UI now, to run on commodity webhosting, and write a C/Python/D++/Go daemon later that has transport layer modularity. That would be a pain, but it would get the network up sooner and wouldn't break the network later.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
