Re: [Social-discuss] Which framework?

[Sean Corbett]

Hi Henry,

On 03/28/2010 11:54 AM, Henry Litwhiler wrote:
> I also don't think that we're on the same page when it comes to 
> commodity web hosting. While users should be able to outsource their 
> GNU Social install to ensure maximum uptime, making it so that the 
> exact same GNU Social application runs on both personal and commodity 
> hosting shouldn't be a priority. We can have one version of GNU Social 
> for people who want to run it on an outsourced server, and one version 
> for people who want to run it at home.

I don't think that this would be a good idea. The software someone will 
need to run to have a GNU Social node should be uniform so that 
installation and maintenance will be uniform, in the same vein as 
something like Wordpress. Also, maintaining different versions for 
different hosting scenarios will create more work; right now, I think we 
need to focus on unifying to work on just one piece of software (maybe 
divided logically into the groups elijah presented), not a bunch of 
different versions of the same thing.

On 03/28/2010 12:04 PM, Henry Litwhiler wrote:
> My idea is that everyone can have this sort of "backbone" application 
> running on their computer (perhaps in Python or C). This application 
> handles all the "behind-the-scenes" interactions between GNU Social 
> installs, through XMPP or another (perhaps original) protocol.

I'm not sure what you mean here. GNU Social servers should be the ones 
performing the behind-the-scenes interactions between installs, not 
client side applications; it will not be a p2p application from what I 
understand. Did I misunderstand something?