- From: Nick Jennings <nick@silverbucket.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:06:16 +0200
- To: Simon Tennant <simon@buddycloud.com>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb <public-fedsocweb@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 17:07:20 UTC
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Simon Tennant <simon@buddycloud.com> wrote: > I really don't think this matters: each federated social network will have > a different use case. > > Webfinger works well when you control the entire stack / have everything > running on one box. > > In our experience, customers installing buddycloud instances have a > marketing firm looking after their "shop-window"/example.com website and > a dev-ops team installing buddycloud software. The dev-ops wouldn't want > the outside webfirm touching their DNS and the webfirm wouldn't want to be > minding to not touch a .hosts-meta on the hosting platform. > > So in buddycloud's case DNS makes more sense. There's no right way or > wrong way: just use what works for your own project and document it well. > > Absolutely, in fact I didn't mean to invalidate the DNS approach, I was just making the case that there's no one right way and different people have different requirements, limitations in infrastructure, and comfort zones.
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 17:07:20 UTC