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

[Rob Myers]

On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:12:41 -0400, Ted Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
> Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Matt Lee is proposing a
> monolithic PHP program. In my model, there is a distinction between the
> core, transport modules, and the UI.

libre.fm (the GNU web service project we did before Social) consists of a
separate data server and UI.

> Additionally, using only PHP means that every time a user wants to have
> their own node, they need to install, configure, secure, and maintain an
> entire GLAMP stack + GNU Social + the interface (the browser, in this
> case). That is an unnecessary and very burdensome level of complexity.

Only if we choose to expose it. We wouldn't ask users to compile their own
web browser, but we would ask them to use a package manager or archive
decompression utility to get the bundle of files that the web browser
consists of. We can package or bundle Social and tell users how to install
it simply on their distro.

There are many important design decisions we can make regarding Social,
but at the moment it *is* going to be a federated server-based PHP/MySQL
system for the reasons that have been given. Issues like encryption and
accessibility are as important in this design as in any other but can we
please focus on how to quickly make something workable using this
architecture. 

- Rob.