Re: [Social-discuss] What I think GNU Social's structure should be

[Ted Smith]

On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 22:55 +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> 
> 
> 2010/3/28 Ted Smith <address@hidden>
>         In all these discussions about what the optimal structure of
>         GNU Social
>         would be, my foremost care has been freedom. I don't yet know
>         what a
>         fully free network service would look like, but I think that
>         it would
>         have to have the following properties:
>         
>              * Based on only free software (obviously)
>              * Federated, so that any user can run their own node if
>         they wish
>              * NOT requiring or encouraging software as a service, or
>         SaaS.
>              * Users totally control who can see their data.
> 
> Agree, tho I've got nothing specifically against SaaS, AGPL should
> solve most issues, from what I understand.
> 
The AGPL is effectively useless against the SaaS threat. For more info,
see
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html>.

> Ive added some comments to the previous topic, and as stated, I think
> the transport layer is not something that I have a strong opinion on,
> but I do think the power and scalability of HTTP(S), is often
> underestimated.  So I think that would be a good one to look at,
> perhaps in conjunction with the other suggestions .
>  

In my system, you would just need to write a transport for HTTP/HTTPS. I
think it's critical to have modular transports even if we don't go with
a UI/core structure, so that we can avoid committing ourselves to one
transport protocol.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part