Re: [diso-project] Digest for diso-project@googlegroups.com - 1 Message in 1 Topic

[Joey Guerra]

Andreas, try installing it on a shared host account like site5.com
(commodity hosting providers) and reply with your experience. That
might convince you.

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:22 AM,
<diso-proje...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>   Today's Topic Summary
>
> Group: http://groups.google.com/group/diso-project/topics
>
> XMPP (Re: [diso-project] Re: Anyone familiarw with 6D?) [1 Update]
>
>  Topic: XMPP (Re: [diso-project] Re: Anyone familiarw with 6D?)
>
> "Andreas Kuckartz" <A.Kuc...@ping.de> May 28 06:17PM +0200 ^
>
> Chris Messina wrote (on March 2, 2010):
>> part of this effort... turned out it was a bit too much to administer
>> on commodity hosting providers, so we abandoned it. 6D says more
>> or less the same thing on their site.
>
> Today I installed an OpenFire XMPP server and the OneSocialWeb plugin on
> a computer. I had not done that before and was interested to find out
> how complicated and time-consuming the installation would be.
>
> It turned out to be far more easy than I had expected. Obviously
> administration involves a lot more than installation but so far I am not
> convinced that XMPP is not suitable on "commodity hosting providers."
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Diso Project" group.
> To post to this group, send email to diso-p...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> diso-project...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/diso-project?hl=en.
>

[Andreas Kuckartz]

Joey Guerra wrote:
> Andreas, try installing it on a shared host account like site5.com
> (commodity hosting providers) and reply with your experience. That
> might convince you.

in reply to my mail:

> so far I am not convinced that XMPP is not suitable on "commodity
hosting providers."

The question might be what can or should be considered a "commodity
hosting providers" in this context. You can rent a physical
(non-virtual) server for about 50 EUR a month in Germany.

In my opinion it will be easier to build a working Open Source solution
which (perhaps) requires such a physical server than one which does not
require such a server. And I think it is important to have such a
solution as soon as possible.

In other words: How much do we need to care about lower level hosting
services ?

Cheers,
Andreas

[Stephen Paul Weber]

Decent commodity hosting like Dreamhost comes with XMPP.

Sent from my Android phone. Topposted :-(

[Erik Bigelow]

Yeah, but all of them come with PHP. XMPP makes a lot of sense for
decentralized social, but building something at its most basic with
progressive enhancement and interoperability in mind I think makes
more.

[Chris Messina]

At the end of the day, we're likely going to need to find on and off ramps for including both XMPP and HTTP based solutions.

We're just moving data around. 

The hard part is interop and getting adoption of various schemas so different endpoints can talk to one another on the fly, without pre-registration or configuration.

I like what the OneSocialWeb guys are doing because they're actually reusing things like ActivityStreams and PortableContacts rather than inventing their own stuff.

Once the schemas are harmonized, we can work on bridging XMPP and HTTP.

Chris

Chris Messina
Open Web Advocate, Google

Personal: http://factoryjoe.com
Follow me on Buzz: http://buzz.google.com/chrismessina
...or Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina

This email is:   [ ] shareable    [X] ask first   [ ] private

[Erik Bigelow]

Sorry I think that came off wrong. I don't think php is or should be
the sole solution. It's just what makes the most sense in the present
with what's most available. By interop I mean all the different apps
should be able to talk to each other. It's a big internet so there
should be enough room for everybody. PHP is only a partial solution
to a bigger problem. XMPP is another part. We need many choices
because they'll all probably be slightly different in features that
some users will like over others, but they should all be able to talk
to each other. So, though 6d hasn't implemented any of the protocols
yet like Activity Streams, it's in the works.

I think the hardest part we're going to have will be getting any
traction with "average users". We're asking them to go from something
that was free (and familiar which may be an even tougher problem to
tackle) to something that will inevitably cost a little money. That's
the issue we've mainly concerned ourselves with. Even though I know a
decentralized web is good for people...how do I "sell" them on it?
Whoever figures this out first will be helping everyone.

[jg]

I should say "shared hosting accounts" instead of "commodity hosting
providers". I see your point about the terminology commodity hosting
provider because it really encompasses most, if not all, hosting
providers since their servers are probably considered commodity
servers. But please don't take my statement as one against using XMPP
for creating distributed social networking applications. On the
contrary, I think the internet of the future will be made up of little
XMPP servers, which of course can be used for social networking,
amongst other applications. I know Dreamhost offers a Jabber chat
server with one of their packages, but I don't know about installing
OSW on it. I didn't think you could.