Re: RE : Re: Federation protocols

On 12 June 2013 14:29, Goix Laurent Walter <
laurentwalter.goix@telecomitalia.it> wrote:

>  thanks for the feedback. indeed i didn’t want to put people against each
> other and may have been limiting in defining these camps. but it seems from
> the feedback there is some consensus on the fact of having mainly 2
> different approaches to the problem (and the solution).  bottom-up vs
> top-down in parallel sounds interesting and may aggregate people into
> common goals.
> bottom-up is what has been done for long in this community for now, as
> melvin was mentioning, in parallel and de facto not interoperable. in this
> track it may be valuable to start selecting one and build from it. input
> from the top-down approach (in particular the feedback from other
> experiences, positives & negatives) could help in moving on the bottom-up
> approach...
>
> i’m interested in both approaches, although i’d like to see really some
> gathering around a single - main - bottom-up project as main driver for all
> the activities (also as leitmotiv of the top-down documentation and
> knowledge sharing part)
>
> does this make sense? any feedback on how to proceed?
>

-1

This is exactly what we tried 3 years ago with OStatus / Status.net ... it
didnt work, because everyone fanned out and stopped working together, and
this group essentially went inactive.

The natural tendency of people is to work in islands, which has created
silos.

I could be completely wrong, but I think we need to to work together in
*this* group to create standards and best practices for federation, which
hasnt happened.  That said, every project has it's own mailing list, and
people are very welcome to work on systems they like.  But I think this
list should be for people that are serious about working *together*

Just my 2 cents (I could be completely wrong) ...


> walter
>
>  *Da:* Michiel B. de Jong
> *Data invio:* mercoledì 12 giugno 2013 11.41
> *A:* public-fedsocweb@w3.org
>
> On 2013-06-12 11:16, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > On Jun 12, 2013 10:22 AM, "Goix Laurent Walter"
> >> Should we formalize these 2 teams to start some concrete
> >> collaborations?
> >
> > Sure, that could help to avoid these kinds of "chasing our tail"
> > discussions in the future.
>
> from my point of view, maybe we can describe it as "bottom-up" (build
> stuff, use it, and see what synergies emerge) vs "top-down" (document
> and discuss things that we already know could work for everybody, to
> avoid reinventing all sorts of wheels).
>
> i don't see them as "camps" but just a distinction to help us all
> understand each other. i think we need both approaches to work in
> tandem, for best results.
>
>
> my 2ct,
> Michiel
>
>    Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente
> alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione
> derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente
> vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete
> cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di
> provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.
>
> *This e-mail and any attachments** is **confidential and may contain
> privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination,
> copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and
> advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.*
> *[image: rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa
> mail se non è necessario.*
>
>