deploy Wave Server inside corporate network
9 views
Skip to first unread message
farshid
May 31, 2009, 10:38:54 PM5/31/09
to Google Wave API
I have got one basic question regarding Wave and its deployment plans.
Will other companies be allowed to run their own instance of Google
Wave server internally or all the users must connect to google wave
shared server.
My major concern is if , for instance , I want to write a plugin which
would store and pass around companies internal communication it can
not be usable for most part if it has to be hosted by google due to
legal issues.
Thanks
Will other companies be allowed to run their own instance of Google
Wave server internally or all the users must connect to google wave
shared server.
My major concern is if , for instance , I want to write a plugin which
would store and pass around companies internal communication it can
not be usable for most part if it has to be hosted by google due to
legal issues.
Thanks
James Purser
May 31, 2009, 10:41:00 PM5/31/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
the demo video they say their going to be open sourcing the "Lions
Share" of the code behind Googles own Wave service. Think of the Wave
Protocol like SMTP/POP3/IMAP. Anyone can build their own implementation,
and so long as they stick to the standard they'll be able to communicate
or not with other wave services.
--
James Purser
Collaborynth
http://collaborynth.com.au
Mob: +61 406 576 553
Skype: purserj1977
twitter: www.twitter.com/purserj
GTalk: jamesr...@gmail.com
farshid
May 31, 2009, 11:44:34 PM5/31/09
to Google Wave API
oh wait , thats a good news and bad news at the same time.
good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
to implement such.
bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
added to the wave server.
We all know it takes more than a month work to implement any engine
based on the spec , and I think we also know that corporates won't be
likely using this feature to implement their collaboration system by
letting google host the server .
I know what I am saying is pointless because google recent business
model clearly speaks as a Cloud Environment to enourage everyone to go
ahead and deploy all they got in Google but still it would be really
nice and good for Wave adoption if google distributes the server
binary and let all corporate users to deploy it in their internal
workspace . ( Think of it as Apache Tomcat that hosts Wave
Applications !! )
On May 31, 7:41 pm, James Purser <jamesrpur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> farshid wrote:
> > I have got one basic question regarding Wave and its deployment plans.
>
> > Will other companies be allowed to run their own instance of Google
> > Wave server internally or all the users must connect to google wave
> > shared server.
>
> > My major concern is if , for instance , I want to write a plugin which
> > would store and pass around companies internal communication it can
> > not be usable for most part if it has to be hosted by google due to
> > legal issues.
>
> > Thanks
>
> The spec is available for anyone to build their own wave server. From
> the demo video they say their going to be open sourcing the "Lions
> Share" of the code behind Googles own Wave service. Think of the Wave
> Protocol like SMTP/POP3/IMAP. Anyone can build their own implementation,
> and so long as they stick to the standard they'll be able to communicate
> or not with other wave services.
>
> --
> James Purser
> Collaborynthhttp://collaborynth.com.au
> GTalk: jamesrpur...@gmail.com
good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
to implement such.
bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
added to the wave server.
We all know it takes more than a month work to implement any engine
based on the spec , and I think we also know that corporates won't be
likely using this feature to implement their collaboration system by
letting google host the server .
I know what I am saying is pointless because google recent business
model clearly speaks as a Cloud Environment to enourage everyone to go
ahead and deploy all they got in Google but still it would be really
nice and good for Wave adoption if google distributes the server
binary and let all corporate users to deploy it in their internal
workspace . ( Think of it as Apache Tomcat that hosts Wave
Applications !! )
On May 31, 7:41 pm, James Purser <jamesrpur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> farshid wrote:
> > I have got one basic question regarding Wave and its deployment plans.
>
> > Will other companies be allowed to run their own instance of Google
> > Wave server internally or all the users must connect to google wave
> > shared server.
>
> > My major concern is if , for instance , I want to write a plugin which
> > would store and pass around companies internal communication it can
> > not be usable for most part if it has to be hosted by google due to
> > legal issues.
>
> > Thanks
>
> The spec is available for anyone to build their own wave server. From
> the demo video they say their going to be open sourcing the "Lions
> Share" of the code behind Googles own Wave service. Think of the Wave
> Protocol like SMTP/POP3/IMAP. Anyone can build their own implementation,
> and so long as they stick to the standard they'll be able to communicate
> or not with other wave services.
>
> --
> James Purser
> GTalk: jamesrpur...@gmail.com
James Purser
May 31, 2009, 11:48:24 PM5/31/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
farshid wrote:
> oh wait , thats a good news and bad news at the same time.
>
> good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
> email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
> to implement such.
>
> bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
> be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
> added to the wave server.
>
Or they could go with a third party provider. Hell the people who make> oh wait , thats a good news and bad news at the same time.
>
> good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
> email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
> to implement such.
>
> bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
> be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
> added to the wave server.
>
email/collaboration type servers now could integrate Wave functionality
and piggy back on existing installs.
> We all know it takes more than a month work to implement any engine
> based on the spec , and I think we also know that corporates won't be
> likely using this feature to implement their collaboration system by
> letting google host the server .
>
They'll either be using Googles own service, or if they need to host in
house, they'll be using a pre-rolled package.
> I know what I am saying is pointless because google recent business
> model clearly speaks as a Cloud Environment to enourage everyone to go
> ahead and deploy all they got in Google but still it would be really
> nice and good for Wave adoption if google distributes the server
> binary and let all corporate users to deploy it in their internal
> workspace . ( Think of it as Apache Tomcat that hosts Wave
> Applications !! )
>
Wave. The source will be available, the wire protocol will be available
and there will be many different organisations involved in the
development and evolution of Wave.
--
James Purser
Collaborynth
http://collaborynth.com.au
Mob: +61 406 576 553
Skype: purserj1977
twitter: www.twitter.com/purserj
GTalk: jamesr...@gmail.com
Kalyan Lanka
May 31, 2009, 11:49:15 PM5/31/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
That is exactly the point..
Third parties can build a Apache tomcat like wave server that can easily deployed in corporate environments. This also gives lot of flavors and vendors support wave-protocol spec
Third parties can build a Apache tomcat like wave server that can easily deployed in corporate environments. This also gives lot of flavors and vendors support wave-protocol spec
Jorge Vargas
May 31, 2009, 11:58:55 PM5/31/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
> oh wait , thats a good news and bad news at the same time.
>
> good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
> email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
> to implement such.
>
> bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
> be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
> added to the wave server.
>
> We all know it takes more than a month work to implement any engine
> based on the spec , and I think we also know that corporates won't be
> likely using this feature to implement their collaboration system by
> letting google host the server .
>
this is why open source exists, you will install an OS version which
>
> good news is anyone can implement their own wave server ( just like
> email server , jabber server ) so they are free to use any framework
> to implement such.
>
> bad news is that companies have to implement their own so they won't
> be able to utilize google implementation and good stuff they have
> added to the wave server.
>
> We all know it takes more than a month work to implement any engine
> based on the spec , and I think we also know that corporates won't be
> likely using this feature to implement their collaboration system by
> letting google host the server .
>
will most likely (at least at first) be implemented on top of the
released version.
Damian Guppy
Jun 1, 2009, 12:44:16 AM6/1/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
Google has stated there will be a refference implentation of wave available for anyone to grab, and as the protocol is updated this reference implementation will be updated too.
Think of the refference implentation as the Acme implementation showed in the demo.
Think of the refference implentation as the Acme implementation showed in the demo.
Matt Mason
Jun 1, 2009, 1:08:39 PM6/1/09
to Google Wave API
Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
If you want mainstream deployment then deploy with mainstream
corporate products. The cutesy stuff will not drive development in
serious worlds where serious money is being spent for talent to
implement.
> Collaborynthhttp://collaborynth.com.au
> GTalk: jamesrpur...@gmail.com
that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
If you want mainstream deployment then deploy with mainstream
corporate products. The cutesy stuff will not drive development in
serious worlds where serious money is being spent for talent to
implement.
> GTalk: jamesrpur...@gmail.com
James Purser
Jun 1, 2009, 8:22:35 PM6/1/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
Matt Mason wrote:
> Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
> are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
> them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
>
If the Google Reference implementation requires it's own HTTP server I'd> Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
> are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
> them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
>
be surprised, however even if that's the case, I'm sure someone will
implement a HTTP server agnostic Wave platform. The joys of an Open Protocol
--
James Purser
Collaborynth
http://collaborynth.com.au
Mob: +61 406 576 553
Skype: purserj1977
twitter: www.twitter.com/purserj
GTalk: jamesr...@gmail.com
Jorge Vargas
Jun 1, 2009, 11:34:27 PM6/1/09
to google-...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Matt Mason
<planetsanta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
> are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
> them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
>
never say never, they will probably see the light and move to a better platform.
<planetsanta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
> are already rolling with IIS and there is NO WAY I will be able to get
> them to implement multiple HTTP Servers.
>
> If you want mainstream deployment then deploy with mainstream
> corporate products. The cutesy stuff will not drive development in
> serious worlds where serious money is being spent for talent to
> implement.
>
servers running on the interwebs?
Jordan Brock
Jun 2, 2009, 2:33:11 AM6/2/09
to Google Wave API
On Jun 2, 1:08 am, Matt Mason <planetsantabarbara....@gmail.com>
wrote:
So, effectively you want Google to write a plugin for a proprietary
product that is developed by one of their competitors? There's as much
chance of that as there is of MS writing their own Wave server
implementation.
No doubt it will be down to some company to write an IIS Add-on, who
will then charge $395 for the development edition and $895 for the
production release. No "cutesy stuff" there :)
wrote:
> Honestly I would rather just have an out of the box implementation
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
> are already rolling with IIS.
> that I could code to that works with IIS. All our corporate clients
So, effectively you want Google to write a plugin for a proprietary
product that is developed by one of their competitors? There's as much
chance of that as there is of MS writing their own Wave server
implementation.
No doubt it will be down to some company to write an IIS Add-on, who
will then charge $395 for the development edition and $895 for the
production release. No "cutesy stuff" there :)
Bob Oliver Bigellow XLII
Jun 2, 2009, 3:45:48 AM6/2/09
to Google Wave API
I think the front-end technology is being confused with the back-end
technology. The back-end will not run on IIS because it is a protocol
in its own right. For the same reason you do not host a website from
your email server or host email on your web server... you would not
run the wave back-end on your web-server... because the back-end is a
protocol in its own right. So, the back-end will have different
installs for different OSes.
As for the front-end, it should work in IIS, Apache, or anything that
can host static HTML pages. I believe the front-end that is shown was
build using GWT. Code written for the GWT is written in Java, then
the compiler generates static HTML files and static JavaScript files.
Ultimately, Google will likely provide the usual free Google Wave
hosted service... will also provide a free and a premium version for
Google Apps... and eventually, service providers around the world will
install their own instances... businesses will install their own
instances... and third-parties will create their own installs to make
it easier for businesses to get into the game, while also getting
proper support. One day, Microsoft might even release their own MS
Wave Server solution.
technology. The back-end will not run on IIS because it is a protocol
in its own right. For the same reason you do not host a website from
your email server or host email on your web server... you would not
run the wave back-end on your web-server... because the back-end is a
protocol in its own right. So, the back-end will have different
installs for different OSes.
As for the front-end, it should work in IIS, Apache, or anything that
can host static HTML pages. I believe the front-end that is shown was
build using GWT. Code written for the GWT is written in Java, then
the compiler generates static HTML files and static JavaScript files.
Ultimately, Google will likely provide the usual free Google Wave
hosted service... will also provide a free and a premium version for
Google Apps... and eventually, service providers around the world will
install their own instances... businesses will install their own
instances... and third-parties will create their own installs to make
it easier for businesses to get into the game, while also getting
proper support. One day, Microsoft might even release their own MS
Wave Server solution.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages