[Sugar-devel] Regarding JS collaboration project

[Prasoon Shukla]

> If I remember correctly Emil also agreed that the new framework should be
independent from telepathy

It seems there were two separate threads of the same name:

1 - http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2014-January/046687.html
2 - http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2014-January/046773.html

and I just read the first one >_<

Anyway, it's good to see that we don't want to use telepathy for this. So,
I'll go ahead and take a look at Emil's code and run it. Will reply back at
this thread soon.


On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:

> If I remember correctly Emil also agreed that the new framework should be
> independent from telepathy at some point and even worked on it.
>
>
> On 9 March 2014 06:45, Prasoon Shukla <prasoon92.iitr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sam. Sorry for the late response but I was occupied with academics.
>>
>> Anyway, I need to bother you again with some questions.
>>
>> So, I went through the thread by Emil Dudev and read the arguments he
>> made in favour of not using the mozilla node server and using telepathy
>> instead. To that, dnarvaez said that using the node server might be a
>> better idea since the current protocol is very unstable.
>>
>> Now, I am somewhat familiar with sugar codebase but certainly not enough
>> to actually discuss the merits or demerits of either of these approaches
>> (although personally, I like better the idea of all communication happening
>> over websocket via a node server). So, the final decision on which approach
>> to take will be in the hands of those more experienced. But as I said
>> before, I would prefer it if we use the websocket protocol to have this
>> kind of architecture:
>>
>> |Sugar Web Activity| <-----> |Sugar Shell|
>>    \
>>     \
>>  websocket
>>       \
>> |Node Server|
>>        /
>>       /
>>      /
>> |Sugar Web Activity| <-----> |Sugar Shell|
>>
>> instead of the usual telepathy based communication. This I would like
>> because:
>> 1. We'll be able to use the mozilla server with modifications as needed.
>> 2. We'll be able to use the *huge* node.js ecosystem for realtime
>> communication in any way we want! And, websocket is very versatile -  we
>> can send pretty much any binary data over the network.
>>
>> Also, I've worked with node before and found the communication to be
>> quite reliable (which it is not with the current XMPP based protocol, if I
>> understood dnarvaez correctly). That said, I've only tested out my node
>> based work with a handful of people, so...
>>
>> The only downside is the need to have a node server running. For the case
>> when there is not internet connectivity, I think we can make a set of
>> scripts that can be called to run a node server on the one of the machines,
>> say that of the teacher, and all others will connect to it. And of course,
>> this process needs to be simple.
>>
>> Anyway, it just seems right to me to augment JS activities with a JS
>> based collaboration framework. But of course, I don't really know the
>> details all too well to be making the decision here.
>>
>> So, can you please comment on this? Once this decision is made, I can
>> start working on my application.
>>
>> Thanks
>> ᐧ
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Narvaez
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20140309/94f40ec2/attachment.html>