Re: Yarrr UI

[Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com>]

Colin Walters <walters redhat com> writes:

> Let me try to summarize some other IRC points made during early morning
> discussion:
> 
> o protocol issues - XMLRPC and polling seems very heavyweight for live
>   chat and stuff

Does it seem heavyweight, or do we know it's heavyweight?  I don't want
to be mucking w/ protocols when we're just trying to get something going
quickly.  It seemed fast enough for the older demo we did.

> o what about attachments?  maybe they show up on the left?

Sure.  No attachments initially, though.  We'll figure that out later.

> o like to have a chance to carefully compose (possibly longer) replies
>   like email; small editing window and live typing display seem to make
>   that difficult

We're not trying to necessarily replace email/irc/everything in one go
here.  We're designing a system to experiment how it fits in.  The whole
point is to build a system and then play with it.

> o new design seems to make email feeding somewhat nonsensical

Yes.  Lets put that down from now.  I imagine we'll come back to it.

> o server design issues - new design doesn't seem very "database-y";
>   you obviously don't want to persist every character someone types
>   in chat window right away

Yeah.  We might want to commit conversations only after a given time.
Or perhaps only store the summary.

> o new design if already implemented would be nice for discussing new
>   design :)

Yes, though we tried that once...

> o usefulness of statements in generic content - would you still have
>   statements for a ☠ for New England Patriots?

Hell yes!

"Letting Joe Andruzzi go was the biggest offseason mistake the Pats
 made!"
 -jrb, clarkbw

"You're on crack!  Troy Brown is the biggest offseason loss"
 -walters, alexl, marco

> o collab editing of comments gets into whole locking and such issues
>   SubEthaEdit was discussed

Yeah.  But lets worry about that if/when we productize it.

> o General uncertainty about what's going to be happening in future;
>   what timeframe is, etc

Lets give ourselves two weeks to implement this.  We can reassess in a
week, but it's a nice round number.

Thanks,
-Jonathan