On Jul 26, 2016 2:36 PM, "Sebastian Silva" <<a href="mailto:sebastian@fuentelibre.org">sebastian@fuentelibre.org</a>> wrote: > > El 26/07/16 a las 13:08, Dave Crossland escribió: >> >> Despite my suggestion to look at zeromq, I think we should be using the collaboration protocols that Lionel is using in Sugarizer, so that someone running Sugar desktop and someone using Sugarizer on a Chromebook (for example, 2 kids in a family at home who attend 2 different schools that have different hardware purchasing decisions ;) could collaborate. > > It's not a dichotomy. > > If two users use the same app [and it supports collaboration] - it should just work regardless of the environment where they are run. > > Much like running etherpad @ titanpad. I mean to propose a requirement for any new collaboration system that is recommended to all sugar developers be that it support collaboration between a python paint application and a Javascript paint application. And therefore the system that meets that requirement is the one used by sugarizer today. >> However, I am eagerly awaiting Sameer's next installment of the vision quest process, because without the vision/mission/etc defined, we can't make informed technical decisions about what kind of collaboration protocols are best. > > > Maybe we shouldn't have to judge - they can all coexist. An anti-design approach where no system is recommended and each activity developer can figure out their own system seems counter to the aims of a cohesive and consistent learning platform in which collaboration is promoted as a top tier feature :)