OneSocialWeb Project Status
Niels Ole Salscheider
I am consindering to implement a XMPP based social web protocol in a
desktop application.
Would you recommend to go with OSW or are there other projects that
are considered to be a better alternative nowadays?
<Daniel.Appelqu...@vodafone.com> wrote:
> We will Continue to work on the protocol, and will support any
> implementers (such as ProcessOne) and collaborate with them to improve
it
> and expand it. Our intention is to contribute the work we have done on
> XMPP
> extensions (e.g. Activity Streams over XMPP) into the relevant XMPP
> technical committees.
Is this still true? I would have considerably less reservations to
spend time on that project if the OSW protocol was proposed as a XEP
and I think others might agree.
Is ProcessOne still working on OSW support for ejabberd? Is there any
code to try?
Regards,
Ole
James Tait
> I am consindering to implement a XMPP based social web protocol in a
> desktop application.
> Would you recommend to go with OSW or are there other projects that
> are considered to be a better alternative nowadays?
I hope this won't be considered bad form, but I haven't seen or heard of
any progress on OSW for many months now, so I've recently begun
concentrating efforts on buddycloud [0] instead, which is also XMPP-based.
> <Daniel.Appelqu...@vodafone.com> wrote:
>> We will Continue to work on the protocol, and will support any
>> implementers (such as ProcessOne) and collaborate with them to improve
> it
>> and expand it. Our intention is to contribute the work we have done on
>> XMPP
>> extensions (e.g. Activity Streams over XMPP) into the relevant XMPP
>> technical committees.
>
> Is this still true? I would have considerably less reservations to
> spend time on that project if the OSW protocol was proposed as a XEP
> and I think others might agree.
Agreed. I don't think it's been proposed yet, but the buddycloud
protocol is written up as a XEP. [1]
> Is ProcessOne still working on OSW support for ejabberd? Is there any
> code to try?
Again, buddycloud is already usable with ejabberd (my preferred setup)
[2, 3].
I don't mean to rain on the OSW parade and I hope people on this list
won't take offense. I'd be happy to be involved in OSW again if it does
turn out to still be active.
JT
[0] http://buddycloud.com/
[1] https://buddycloud.org/wiki/XMPP_XEP
[2] https://buddycloud.org/wiki/Install
[3] https://buddycloud.org/wiki/Installing_buddycloud_on_ejabberd
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
James Tait, BSc | xmpp:jayt...@wyrddreams.org
Programmer and Free Software advocate | Tel: +44 (0)870 490 2407
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Daniel Bo
Considering that the OSW team was basically dissolved, I don't think
you're out of line to recommend an active project at all.
Daniel Bo
Luca Faggioli
2012/1/6, Daniel Bo <dae...@gmail.com>:
--
Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile
Luca Faggioli
OneSocialWeb JID: lu...@social.openliven.com
Heiko Braun
Daniel Bo
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Heiko Braun <ike....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> +1 for buddycloud
Daniel E. Renfer
Hash: SHA1
I'd just like to point out, that while all progress with OneSocialWeb
has effectively stalled, the fundamentals are sill basically sound and
all the code is still there.
If you really want to contribute to a distributed social network using
XMPP, then go with Buddycloud as it most certainly has a brighter future.
However, if anyone is interested in taking up work on OSW again, I, as
well as several others, would love to hear from you.
My own attempt at the OSW protocol is mostly there, but I haven't put
much effort into the OSW side lately. I would love to have assistance
there. https://github.com/duck1123/jiksnu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk8HuRIACgkQWorbjR01Cx4X9QCeLWtHu6UrGPDCJENQSlsV0Rad
gRwAoM173eSbo7cehHEVUfXZ5R3+S75I
=ul8q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Niels Ole Salscheider
> If you really want to contribute to a distributed social network using
> XMPP, then go with Buddycloud as it most certainly has a brighter future.
it's protocol consists of 4 smaller parts that could be proposed as a
XEP and might have a chance to get accepted. At the first glance,
buddyclound's protocol seems to be one big chunk.
Regards,
Ole
PS: Having a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_social_network#Comparison_of_projects
I wonder if there is not way too much fragmentation for any of these
projects to gather a noteworthy userbase...
Tuomas Koski
On 7 January 2012 14:18, Niels Ole Salscheider
<niels.ole....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Daniel wrote:
>> If you really want to contribute to a distributed social network using
>> XMPP, then go with Buddycloud as it most certainly has a brighter future.
>
> I will have a look at buddycloud then. What I like about OSW is that
> it's protocol consists of 4 smaller parts that could be proposed as a
> XEP and might have a chance to get accepted. At the first glance,
> buddyclound's protocol seems to be one big chunk.
<as buddycloud dev>
Yes, it's a pretty big chunk. The reason for it is that we first want
to get a working solution before thinking too much of making it a
protocol.
<as buddycloud dev/>
I would be happy if you would join us on buddycloud-dev mailing list
(https://groups.google.com/group/buddycloud-dev) or our conference
channel (see...@buddycloud.org) to share your ideas, concerns and feedback.
We are an open team. All code is available in the github
(https://github.com/buddycloud). We have also a wiki
(https://buddycloud.org/wiki/Main_Page) if that kind of contribution
interest.
Hope to hear from you more soon!
Cheers,
--
Tuomas
Daniel Appelquist
From a perspective of an ex-"product manager" on OSW I would love to see the protocol and code taken up and used by others. Everything is open source. However, if anyone would like to evolve the protocol significantly then I would like to recommend doing it within the context of a w3c community group: http://www.w3.org/community/
Community groups are a new process by which working groups can be spun up quickly with very little overhead and no cost - groups that anyone can participate in (not only people from w3c member organizations). Although I cannot offer much of my time right now I would definitely help set up the infrastructure and support for creation of such a group.
</end-plug>
Thanks and best of luck,
Dan
Melvin Carvalho
+1 to community group
If someone wants to start one, I'd be happy to vote it up. I'm sure
it would not be an issue to get it approved ...
Evan Prodromou
I would support the creation of a new FSW community group.
However, I think Harry was planning to get it started.
Can you coordinate with him first?
-Evan
On 01/11/2012 03:24 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> The W3C Federated Social Web Incubator Group also is inactive since it
> ended on 15 December 2011.
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/federatedsocialweb/charter
>
> I am cross-posting to the still functioning W3C Federated Social Web
> Incubator mailing list.
>
> I remember that a decision was made a few months ago to create a W3C FSW
> community group. But as far as I know this has not yet been done. If
> there are no objections and no other volunteers I will attempt to do
> that next week.
>
> It would also be a good home for OneSocialWeb people. I do not think
> that it currently would make sense to create a separate OSW community group.
>
> The most appropriate home for the development of protocols such as XMPP
> XEPs might be xmpp.org. But that also requires people who contribute.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
> ---