social-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Social-discuss] My Facebook Problem - And Yours


From: Henry Litwhiler
Subject: Re: [Social-discuss] My Facebook Problem - And Yours
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:40:39 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Thunderbird/3.0.4

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 04/25/2010 06:38 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> +cc Evan
> 
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Stéphane Laborde
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> What about starting with a Status.net fork ?
> 
> Maybe this is just a terminology issue, but there shouldn't be too
> much need to fork the core codebase; they have put a lot of work into
> modularity, APIs etc eg http://status.net/wiki/API ... and also
> plugins and themes - http://status.net/wiki/HOWTO_Make_a_Plugin
> http://status.net/wiki/HOWTO_Make_a_Theme ...
> 
> If GNU Social wants to do something not supported by any of that, I'd
> suggest having a chat with Evan. Maybe the projects are too different
> in goals to directly use StatusNet but perhaps there are common
> sub-components / libraries that can at least be shared.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 

We don't want this to become "StatusNet with modifications" - we want it
to have its own, unique codebase - not just a distributed SatusNet
implementation.

Admittedly, we do need to be focusing more on the way the different GNU
Social users communicate with one another than on the basic software
that allows users to post content. Re-using StatusNet code might seem
like a good time saver, but I would argue that it would actually make
for more work on our part.

If we use the SatusNet code, we'll either have to fit our code around
StatusNet, which will take some extra time, and may or may not produce
the GNU Social we hope to create, or we'll have to modify the StatusNet
code to work with our vision of GNU Social, which would:

a) Take longer.
and
b) Potentially cause technical problems down the road, especially as we
improve GNU Social's feature list.

I'm not saying that we write GNU Social "from scratch"; there are a
number of libraries that we can make use of to speed up the development
process and (hopefully) reduce the number of bugs in our code. I am
saying, however, that we would be better off writing our own, basic
StatusNet-style microblogging implementation that suits our needs. It
wouldn't have to be anything fancy, for the time being - it would just
have to be a way for testers to interface with the (arguably more
import, for now) underlying GNU Social protocol and backbone software.

- --
Henry L.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=j0WD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]