4 ms·
Rewriting the client sounds like an awful task, but it might be necessary. I think I liked wave, but really have no interest in trying to get that online. If it
by rkuykendall-com 13y ago
Rewriting the client sounds like an awful task, but it might be necessary. I think I liked wave, but really have no interest in trying to get that online. If it was a stack I knew ( Rails ) or a stack I knew would be nice to use ( Flask, Node ) I might be interested in getting a copy online and maybe contributing.
Just for curiosity's sake, let's say I wanted to write a REALLY bare-bones Wave client. Like, maybe just doing text-only waves, maybe not even real time. How hard would that be?
- leephillips 13y agoThere is a console client for Wave: http://www.waveprotocol.org/code/console-client http://www.waveprotocol.org/code/console-client
- darkflame 13y agoI think thats not supported anymore, remember seeing something about it being legacy code flagged for removal (if it hasnt already been)
- Jtsummers 13y agohttps://code.google.com/p/wave-client-for-emacs/ https://code.google.com/p/wave-client-for-emacs/ A client written for emacs in emacs lisp. I haven't looked at it in detail and it doesn't look like it's been touched in a while, but it may be a good place to start. I don't know if this was the same client, but during the initial Google I/O demo they had an example that I believe was using emacs. Timeline would fit with both when this was made and who made it.
- darkflame 13y agoI have been wanting to do this for ages...but without a established client/sever protocol its a nightmare. And GWT is fine, I love GWT, but the current codebase has the current client and sever tied together you cant work on one without the other! They badly need to separate them out, establishing a protocol in the process.