[isf-wifidog] Re: Roadmap?

[Philippe April]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I would just like to point out that I share exactly what Mina said  
(we discussed about it this morning).

On 18-May-05, at 1:27 PM, Michael Lenczner wrote:

> It's a shame that Benoit is not yet back from his trip.  He's been a
> lead developper, mostly involved in the auth server, and he groks the
> high-level stuff really well.
>
> It would be a shame for IleSansFil if people forked the project right
> now, but it sounds like it would be a shame for the rest of the groups
> if each one started working on their own as well.  Even if ISF can't
> come up with a good long-term roadmap, then the rest of you from other
> groups should suggest your own roadmaps so that you could work in
> collaboration with the other people interested in using wifidog.  I'm
> particularly thinking of people like Matthew Asham talking to Jo and
> Saul. I know that Matthew and his group has been thinking of how they
> want to use Wifidog for quite some time now.
>
> Frankly, going back to the first sentance, I think Benoit would be a
> great person to organize the features/requests of different groups and
> could do a great job of seeing where exactly we diverge.  He is a very
> good project manager.  If people could wait making any decisionsto
> fork the project until he get's back from france that would be cool.
> If not - no hard feelings.  We should have been ready for this.
>
> the rest of the wifidog developpers - what are your opinions on all  
> this?
>
> On 5/18/05, Mina Naguib <webmaster at topfx.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Mina from the IleSansFil camp here.
>>
>> I've just had a discussion about your thoughts with Philippe, another
>> IleSansFil hacker.
>>
>> As horrible as this sounds, we have no roadmap.  Even worse, I don't
>> think we can have a roadmap.
>>
>> The bulk of WiFiDog (client and auth) has been developed.  We've  
>> got a
>> small to-do list (throttling/etc), but for the most part, the hacking
>> is done.
>>
>> What we're doing now is building the community instead of building  
>> the
>> software.  This does entail changing the auth server quite a bit, but
>> it's reflective of the community needs as they arise (profile, now
>> instant messenger, now flickr, now.... etc.).
>>
>> We *could* sit down and make a roadmap of the features that are  
>> coming,
>> however 1. It will not be complete 2. It will be highly
>> community-centric and 3. It may be highly irrelevant for other groups
>>
>> Please keep in mind that IleSansFil has always been about the  
>> community
>> and that's where our auth server/portal is headed (starting to show
>> around the waistline too ;)  If a wireless group is heading in a
>> similar direction, bulls-eye. If not, well, that's where we're at  
>> right
>> now:)
>>
>> The following are my personal opinions and Philippe's.  They are not
>> reflective of the other hackers or IleSansFil as a whole:
>>
>> 1. We should re-write the client <--> auth protocol to be cleaner and
>> more extensible.  This entails some modifications to both the client
>> and server.
>> 2. We should continue releasing the client, as well as a very clear
>> protocol documentation
>> 3. Along with the above, we should release a very light
>> proof-of-concept auth server that demonstrates the use of the  
>> protocol
>> from the server perspective (maybe in a couple of different
>> languages/CGI frameworks if we're nice).  We should release it with a
>> pluggable modules architecture and maybe a couple of simple modules.
>> 4. We will continue releasing our existing auth server with all it's
>> community-oriented stuff, in case a group has similar goals.   
>> Hopefully
>> we could modularize it a bit to make it lighter.
>>
>> If a group has similar goals they'll work with #4, otherwise they'll
>> use #3 as a platform for building the auth server so they can  
>> "have it
>> their way".
>>
>> Frankly I don't see the need for "the one, the only" definitive auth
>> server to be used with the wifidog client.  As groups develop their
>> needs, features could be shared to other groups as needed (similar to
>> what the *BSD camps do).  The client is dumb and the protocol is
>> simple.  The cleverness is all in the server.
>>
>> I'd like to hear comments on the above, especially from IleSansFil
>> volunteers, but also from other users of WiFiDog.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> WiFiDog mailing list
> WiFiDog at listes.ilesansfil.org
> http://listes.ilesansfil.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wifidog
>
>

Philippe April
GnuPG http://key.philippeapril.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCi4I/Oq+Ep5Xn/aARAlzdAKConvNJLLZFaWDsdFtpMd9I2xd2VQCfTIuv
aBoT0Jf4TCBwBjH1ANKur6c=
=ytMV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----