On 31 December 2012 18:17, hellekin (GNU Consensus)
<address@hidden> wrote:
On 12/31/2012 09:32 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
> +1 looks like a great initiative
>
*** +12 so far, on the mailing list :)
> I very much look forward to testing interop. May I suggest three points
> that can operate as a starting point.
>
> 1. Someone in Project A wishes to friend someone in Project B
>
> 2. Someone in Project B wishes to friend someone in Project A
>
> 3. The two people, having established friendship, should be able to send
> each other a private message.
>
> You will find that 90% of projects that claim to inteorp CANNOT do
> this. Some will never be able to do it. Let's quickly try towork out
> which projects are serious about interop, and for which, it is a
> marketing vehicle.
>
*** Excellent points, Melvin. Welcome!
I put our conversations of the other day on the LibrePlanet wiki:
http://libreplanet.org/wiki/User_talk:Hellekin/A_Coder_Perspective_Of_GNU_Social
The plan is to register a GNU/consensus interest group on LibrePlanet.
as vector to distill the conversation of this list, and allow more
people to participate more easily. Then we can update the official
GNU/consensus website accordingly. What do you think?
Sounds good. If we can have a project that drives interop, and can record and measure the results, that's going to be big plus. Because we've not had the resources to do that before. If you've ever used the 'wine' program they measure the comparability of many projects with GNU linux and give it a rating on a wiki page bronze/silver/gold. I'm not sure that's the perfect way, but if we can have something concrete, like badges, it could mean something.
> Also I am concerned about GNU favouring proprietary protocols, over
> existing web standards, or standards under creative commons.
>
*** Of course, the GNU's mission is to foster user freedom. I contacted
the tent.io people earlier to start a discussion with them on that
topic, but didn't receive any response yet. I hope they're going to jump
on board, as well as Evan Prodromou, who's working on transition from
StatusNet to pump.io[1].
tent.io is a good project imho ... dont forget the open graph protocol, everything you need is there, and it's the state of the art, im less worried about web 2.0 stuff, they tend to do their own thing, let's see ...
> free to MODIFY the protocols used?
> Will the license of the protocols used reflect that?
>
*** I, nor the GNU project, don't have any authority to determine what
licenses the protocols are using. We can only issue recommendations, and
hope the community cooperates toward these goals. Obviously, being part
of the GNU project makes it clear what we're looking for!
We should encourage free software principles ie the freedom to inspect and modify. for protocols just as software. I can understand some proprietary protocols are useful, when they are the state of the art. But to use proprietary stuff that's years behind leading edge needs a good explanation. I would say we can learn a lot from the best proprietary protocols, and have already. But we should also not be afraid to embrace real standards like linked data that are starting to get a good track record, and doubling every 9 months...
Cheers,
==
hk