moving from google/github to w3c infrastructure? (was Re: [unhosted] Fwd: Welcome to the Native Web Apps Community Group!

[Michiel de Jong]

Hi!

I changed the subject of this thread because it didn't seem to match the content:

On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:37 AM, ya knygar <kny...@gmail.com> wrote:

That message makes me wonder if Unhosted is planning to standardize the efforts?

That new W3C CG's seems like a nice place to start.

but, yes, absolutely! It would be good if we can move our mailing list from google to w3c, and our wiki from github to w3c. :). thanks for reminding me, i just did the next step which was adding the group description. the group is now pending approval under the name 'unhosted web community group' with short name 'unhosted'.

although that's not entirely explicit i think it would also express a desire to become a w3c standard at some point. In the past we talked about whether we should aim for w3c or oasis. at the time, we said it was too early to worry about such things. but now, people have started asking me if we could make our standard a bit more official, so people know it's "a thing" and there are a lot of people moving in a same direction on this. especially enterprise and government would prefer to add a w3c logo to their press releases instead of adding our unknown name. So yeah, i think w3c would be good, especially since they are the publishers of html5, which is i think what we're most connected with. Also, our ideas fit very well into their vision, i think (ref http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html).  i was actually already looking at it, but hadn't gotten 'round to creating this mailing list thread about it, sorry for that. :)

cheers!

Michiel

[Pelle Wessman]

I would say: Stick with GitHub and Google Groups and go with the Open Web Foundation instead of the W3C - I think using familiar tools and simple licenses will help a project reach wider adoption.

/ Pelle Wessman

[ya knygar]

>GitHub and Google Groups

since project is already there -- +1

in future - self host your code etc. )

> Open Web Foundation instead of the W3C

there are some initial summary - http://www.downes.ca/post/45402

here is the recent comment of http://www.identitywoman.net/

"me: hello, could we chat a few words? we need your advice..
me: on topic if http://Unhosted.org project that is about
self-hosting or at least owning the data of Web Apps -- should try to
make the next step with OWF or with W3C CG's
i'v seen your article about OWF, but now there are similar (besides -
foundation) - proposition from W3C

Kaliya: Hello
well you could do both
they are not exclusionary
you could/should put it under OWF's agreement ... it has wide spread acceptance
OWF has no structure to support you/the community really.
me: thank you
.."

Excuse me Michiel - that i constantly forgot to say that apps entirely could
be ran on users machines.. it's like - it is - a possibility from
defaults, for me :)

Well, there are great people among OWF participants,
however they are as busy as they great, often.

I think - WHATWG is also the place to discuss, however all should
lead to W3C or there would be a complete mess.

I think - Unhosted propositions should fit particularly to Web Applications
groups, among other cases that may rise -- well - such as distributed structures

--
PS: We are invited to http://www.internetidentityworkshop.com/ and
http://www.idcommons.net
to say - identity desicions are on top of lists of project i'm
involved in. They are constantly like questions
yet.

[Michiel de Jong]

ok, we can work these higher-level issues out as we go along. first, everybody write some apps! :)

you can start with publishing all your existing draft apps, even if they're still buggy, here:

https://github.com/unhosted/unhosted/wiki/Existing-apps

also, anybody can take the myfavouritesandwich app and turn it into something else. as Thad said, that's probably the fastest way forward right now.

cheers!

Michiel

[Norv]

I would love to see the discussions moved away from Google groups.
With the current G+ mess, the project may get more interested people,
however using non-Google tools might be handy for some. :)
Just a thought.

[ya knygar]

+1 for Norv)

for sure - all the current platform including GitHub,
aren't very cool for many old-school "hackers".

All these are Cloud, proprietary platforms,
however - if move - better to move into something
at least - as useful.

I'v seen the Unhosted CG proposition on W3C, i
have used CG's structure and i like,
however - it is in a Beta state currently,
so don't expect all to be perfect.

For what is needed - Great Mailing lists with Search X)
is there so you could easily move from Google Groups.

Issue tracker is there, simple community blog system is
there, Git tracker isn't and probably would never be.

[Ben Webb]

On 30 August 2011 22:56, ya knygar <kny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> for sure - all the current platform including GitHub,
> aren't very cool for many old-school "hackers".

> Issue tracker is there, simple community blog system is

> there, Git tracker isn't and probably would never be.

I suspect people may have already heard of it, but if you're looking
for a free software alternative to github, there's always
https://gitorious.org/

[dodo]

>> Issue tracker is there, simple community blog system is
>> there, Git tracker isn't and probably would never be.
>
> I suspect people may have already heard of it, but if you're looking
> for a free software alternative to github, there's always
> https://gitorious.org/
>

last time i checked its was horribly unmaintainable ... and you needed
dome kind of a bad-ass water-cooling machinery in you basement to run
it.
so if you have it and 24/7 time to stick around as an admin, please
feel free to set it up.

i would recommend codetube[0][1] if its ready .. so if you guys have
some time left to add some features like forking and/or pull-requests
it could be more useful.

[0] https://codetu.be
[1] http://blog.codetu.be