Re: [unhosted] NimbusBase and unhosted movement

[Michiel B. de Jong]

Hi!

> My name is Ray, I'm the developer of http://nimbusbase.com/, an application
> backend built on a user's own cloud storage (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.)

Honoured to meet you! Yes, of course we know NimbusBase. Let's join forces! :)

The way that could work would be adding support for remotestorage
to NimbusBase, in addition to Dropbox support. The spec is here:

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestorage-00.txt

Like the Dropbox API, it works with a simple cross-origin PUT request. One
thing that is slightly different is the discovery: the user inputs their
remotestorage address ('user@host') into the app, and the API endpoint of
the user's storage server is discovered at runtime.

So it makes things even a bit more dynamic than what NimbusBase already is.
I think it would be great if NimbusBase apps could offer a choice to users:

* Dropbox
* GoogleDrive
* remotestorage

What do you think? Is there anything we can help with to get the ball
rolling? I'm at Hacker Beach right now, in the timezone directly opposite
New York, but it might make sense to try to find a time slot to chat about
this in a bit more detail?


Cheers!
Michiel.

[NimbusBase]

Hi Michiel,

I'm surprised anyone has heard of NimbusBase since we're one developer and I just launched last October.

Sorry I missed you this morning, woke up late. Some thoughts on collaboration ideas: (this will be long)

1. Add remote storage as an option in NimbusBase as suggested previous email

Cost: Adding another provider like I currently add Dropbox or Google Drive (in progress). This could take a while to get to and is difficult since api points are dynamic, but definitely doable.

Result: Any users of NimbusBase would be able to also use remote storage to login. However, this would only work for the intersection of NimbusBase users and people with a remote storage account, which might be small. Also, new apps in the unhosted movement will have to choose between using NimbusBase, which integrates 3 providers, or just remotestorage. However, NimbusBase apps will not be compatible with the current remotestorage apps.

2. Adding NimbusBase as a provider to remotestorage

Cost: This is easier since NimbusBase can be added as a local object and will mirror what is being executed in the browser's remotestorage library. However, the concept of a path doesn't really exist in NimbusBase and modeling that will need some wrangling. There are also a lot of remotestorage methods that just doesn't exist in NimbusBase. Maybe an option is to support a subset(?)

Result: Theoretically apps currently now built on remotestorage can now also use Dropbox and Google Drive to login via NimbusBase as well as the remotestorage option. All apps built in the future on remotestorage would have access to be able to write to Dropbox or Google.

3. Add NimbusBase as an alternative to remotestorage for the unhosted movement and cross promote

Cost: None, no integration

Result: NimbusBase can be added as an additional technology, and people can choose what's best for their projects. However, since we're a commercial venture, and unhosted seems like a non-profit movement with one project which is remotestorage, it might not work.

4. Collaborate in building a rockstar open source app that does something significant and well, and release it to the world with both remotestorage and Nimbusbase version. Ideas: Basecamp clone, wunderlist clone, kippt clone, pinterest clone, etc

Cost: App building time differs, but would require people with front end javascript skills and also people with design skills

Result: Unhosted is a great concept, but there is no large app to prove that it works like Basecamp did for rails. What the world probably need to see is a really useful and popular app that is unhosted. Any app built with the remotestorage concept can probably also be converted to NimbusBase. 

I think 1 has very little benefit to anybody, 2 can be beneficial in time, and 3 would help NimbusBase a lot if the community is ok with it. I think 4 is what really needs to be done to make unhosted a universal reality.

This email might have been too long...

Thanks,
Ray

[Michiel B. de Jong]

Hi!

> 3. Add NimbusBase as an alternative to remotestorage for the unhosted
> movement and cross promote

> *
> *
> *Cost:* None, no integration
> *Result:* NimbusBase can be added as an additional technology, and people

> can choose what's best for their projects. However, since we're a
> commercial venture, and unhosted seems like a non-profit movement with one
> project which is remotestorage, it might not work.

Actually the unhosted movement is an anarchist movement without a centralized
government - in fact i would say it does not even have a decentralized
government. :) It is just a subset of the open web app movement:

web apps = hosted web apps + unhosted web apps

Nobody (not even the W3C) can officially add, or fail to add, a technology
to the web be decree; it is the sum of what people use in practice.

So NimbusBase is already a part of the unhosted movement because it deals
with web apps that have no per-app hosted backend.

The current landing page on https://unhosted.org/ is a stop-gap, there is
a ticket for creating a new good main page that describes unhosted web apps.
So I'll make sure NimbusBase is mentioned on there.

Likewise, please use the term "unhosted web app" as synonymous to
"serverless" or "a static html page" as you call it in your documentation,
and "browser applications" or "static web apps" as Dropbox call them. html5 apps,
offline apps, client-side apps, fat client, it's all the same concept of
"web apps that are not hosted web apps", so we call them "unhosted web apps".

> 4. Collaborate in building a rockstar open source app that does something
> significant and well, and release it to the world with both remotestorage
> and Nimbusbase version. Ideas: Basecamp clone, wunderlist clone, kippt
> clone, pinterest clone, etc

how would you do this? One backbone app with two backbone store implementations?

I don't "speak" backbone myself, but maybe Niklas or Martin or someone else
has ideas about how remoteStorage modules can expose collections (folders) of
models (files) more fluently? Not sure if this is possible in a way that would
make sense, but it's worth a try! :)

At least, please consider NimbusBase apps as first-class "unhosted web apps",
and promote them as such, because they (as apps) have no backend, and i will
also make sure the new unhosted.org main page will reflect that.


Cheers!
Michiel