2010/4/25 Henry Litwhiler <[email protected]> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 04/25/2010 11:17 AM, Dan Brickley wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Henry Litwhiler <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> We have very little written down regarding the design of GNU Social, > >> partially because we haven't agreed on/figured out even some of the more > >> fundamental aspects of the design, and partially because we just haven't > >> gotten around to writing it down. > > > > > > Yet you can say with perfect confidence that you'll make a new > > independent software package, even before there's rough consensus on > > what problems you expect it to solve? > > > >> A few people got together at the FSF on the 21st of April, and put some > >> (very minimal) meeting notes up on the LibrePlanet wiki: > >> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/Group:GNU_Social/2010-04-21 . > > > > Indeed minimal, but it's a start :) > > > > I'll copy them here: > > > > short term goals > > > > "sign up and log in > > text area ("about me") > > gravatar > > add friends by URL > > update and store status > > view other profiles" > > > > Ok, I'm still missing the need for a brand new project here. There are > > a dozen systems that do this, probably several of which GPL'd. > > I'm sure that there are plenty of projects that can meet our needs (for > the time being, anyway), with only minor modifications. I was simply > arguing that StatusNet might not be our best choice, because of its > focus on (relative) centralization. >
Have you seen? http://freedns.afraid.org/stats/ > > > > >> We also have > >> some (contradictory) ideas written down here: > >> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/Group:GNU_Social/Ideas . > > > > That's useful, and detailed. And contradictions are OK for now. They > > guarantee no existing software will meet your needs, at least ;) > > > > Excerpting, > > "Goals > > Privacy- users should be in control of their own data > > Distributed- anyone can set up their own node or server to become part > > of the network > > Portability- software should run on the widest array of hosts possible > > Simplicity- simple to set up; a simple base installation to serve as a > > platform for a wide array of extensions > > Extensibility- easy to implement and distribute new functionality > > Scalability- the extended network should be able to scale to the same > > degree as the World Wide Web > > Freedom (of course)" > > > > I'll argue something quirky here. that decentralisation on the Web > > rests on user control of domain names. And that the UI offered by DNS > > registrars currently is not suited to the needs of ordinary people, > > who partly as a consequence head off to live under facebook.com or > > myspace.com domains. > > > > Rather than creating yet another package for blogging, writing > > profiles, listing and linking friends, ... how about addressing a > > deeper problem: it is way too hard to do these things while doing them > > from a domain that *you* own and control. Decentralising out of the > > social-network megasites is a start, but we'll end up with users > > getting locked into smaller social network sites instead; sites which > > are equally likely, perhaps more likely to fail in various ways. The > > only way they'll be truly portable is when each users's Web content > > lives under domains that they can freely move around to different host > > services. > > The way the internet's domain system is set up, it would be almost > impossible to give every user of current social networking "megasites" > their own unique domain name. For now, we'll just have to accept the > fact that, for most users, the only practical way of giving them a way > of identifying themselves outside of their (usually dynamic) IP > addresses is by giving them either: > > a) A subdomain (johnsmith.gnusocial.com). > or > b) A subdirectory (gnusocial.com/~johnsmith<http://gnusocial.com/%7Ejohnsmith> > ). > > Or users could go with an existing service, like DynDNS. Either way, the > site wouldn't be storing or managing any of the user's data - it would > just be providing the user with an easy way of identifying themselves - > that is, through their own subdomain/directory. > > > > > If the goals are really to drive the software rather than vice-versa, > > I think the list here motivates some serious work around improving > > usability of DNS for hosting normal users' sites. For example, > > lobbying dns registrars for oauth Web API and writing patches for > > Drupal etc that allow user pages to be different per user. > > > >> We should probably get around to having an organized, well-planned IRC > >> meeting at some point in the near future. > > > > Sounds like a good idea... > > > > cheers, > > > > Dan > > - -- > Henry L. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJL1GCcAAoJEIRrI0p6YC9XBykP/2y7uSLOgRyW5gwg0UPcORSV > pu6VHkDGoP1QNBSs0RRCNJQQ120vE57ZPmSsEdrQJM0dBYrlMrYhlH+T8iBGO930 > rdK63jygNcl8tunqMR7iZCdqaELRBADXM3re3gDpP94u02G2WHeL0vUgVvkzjJvk > KzNaFs9kYqpSaMdVwkv9yQnmOvgXnK1SZWJyQFp/88gpkY0hVJ3n9H8oxFm7peBd > yyGBaxSJhKfz2xFIgpbdSznC0MDEHH9P2OMEEJDDI8atawmj8DkZZfBjRwKqGG+e > 1MNDU9fqPSEVexVZhEpPLDtJq/DoyBLHMQZj9PIIG8sqM71aINm3DRQUet8Q6+u8 > 2d+OAvi1WFBqF/03q9edXJNYp2GkdTvHEBNg/VAjMjBtLPhbVHOQf7vaQZ0aWeQ9 > M9D6kxMFmgqlgUE+JzkqviGGJonxpiuOj/h9IX6H9PeyaT+DUyaly5lnkbAbajpy > YzeSL4gpfRFp0RbvI3m7/BS74CrSjoUslI0HnaH9uHIz6mMg8iZRxi/FwfVxlcJs > DfifMFxwfXid9eyR+xMLoBTmZ/Pwvo6rPJGg5YGekaUPa9jmLythKIf83GL3WJI2 > Bg49RY/jYz3v/dWwncuj9O6/4tIomTuEA5ZFXUMLXCDBFWASXTalv6WKojPs0wlP > yKotH5SbMLPkTfm73YkE > =/xAU > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >
