Hi all,

First of all, Happy New Year! I hope you've all enjoyed the holidays and wish you (and Mira!) all the best for the coming year.

I was thinking about the sync system and had an idea. This may seem a bit rash, but I think it will bring the 0.1 release date much nearer and also help us to tackle the sync system in steps.

For the 0.1 release, I propose that we have *no synchronisation system*. I know that the whole point of this project is to allow people to communicate and collaborate over a network, but perhaps we should "neuter" this release in order to focus on building the data storage and retrieval system as effectively as possible.

I think we should design and implement a storage system (with version control support, as discussed) for the Mira Client for the 0.1 release and provide two very basic Utilities: Files and Notes. Files will use the version controlled storage and Notes will use the database storage, allowing us to test both modules. The version control system should be implemented baring in mind the fact that the storage system will later be adapted to synchronise with other computers, so it should be designed in such a way that it can be adapted for both client-server and P2P sharing support at a later date.

What I'm essentially saying is that the 0.1 release will be useless. Mira Client will communicate with the Server for authentication, etc, but the synchronisation system will not work. Mira Client will store Workplace data locally and not share it with any other computers. It may disillusion some of us, but I believe that it will set us up perfectly for the next stage, 0.2, in which we can adapt the storage system and its version control functions to operate with other networked Clients via the Server.

What do you think? As an Open Source project, we need to be realistic about our goals and not aim for too much in too short a time because we will not accomplish it. However, if we attack this challenge using a step-by-step approach, I think we will get much further and work more efficiently.

Please discuss this proposal - do you think this is a good idea or a bad one, and why? Is this dumbing down the 0.1 release too much or does it make it a more realistic target for Q2 2008, our original intended release date (which is of course flexible, but if we can focus on a target then our releases should be faster and better)?

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org

Hi all,

I'd like to call a developer meeting on #mira this Sunday at 16:00 UTC. I don't want this meeting to drag on, but I feel that it is important to discuss our targets for Mira Groupware 0.1 so that we can focus on the features which are absolutely necessary for this alpha release. An example of this is whether we should include a synchronisation system or neglect it until 0.2, or how much of a role the Security Layer will play in the next few releases.

I'd also like to discuss Thurston and Alan's latest work on the Client and Server respectively, and assess approximately how much of each application is left to complete for the 0.1 release.

Please reply stating whether you can or cannot make it (or leave your name in the relevant column on the comms page). :)

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org

Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 16:11:01 +0100
From: aib.wolphin-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
To: mira-development <at> lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Mira-development] Developer Meeting on Sunday 6th January at 16:00 UTC

Hi all,

I'd like to call a developer meeting on #mira this Sunday at 16:00 UTC. I don't want this meeting to drag on, but I feel that it is important to discuss our targets for Mira Groupware 0.1 so that we can focus on the features which are absolutely necessary for this alpha release. An example of this is whether we should include a synchronisation system or neglect it until 0.2, or how much of a role the Security Layer will play in the next few releases.

I'd also like to discuss Thurston and Alan's latest work on the Client and Server respectively, and assess approximately how much of each application is left to complete for the 0.1 release.

Please reply stating whether you can or cannot make it (or leave your name in the relevant column on the comms page). :)

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org

From: tstone2077-PkbjNfxxIARBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org
To: mira-development <at> lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 10:17:59 -0500
Subject: Re: [Mira-development] Developer Meeting on Sunday 6th January at 16:00 UTC

.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}

I would like to make it, but I am in Pacific Standard Time.  That would make the meeting <at> 6AM, which is difficult for me to do, especially on a sunday.  Is it possible to push it back a couple of hours?  I can certainly do an 8AM or 9AM meeting.  If not, I'll do my best to be up at 6.

Thurston

Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 16:11:01 +0100
From: aib.wolphin-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
To: mira-development-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
Subject: [Mira-development] Developer Meeting on Sunday 6th January at 16:00 UTC

Hi all,

I'd like to call a developer meeting on #mira this Sunday at 16:00 UTC. I don't want this meeting to drag on, but I feel that it is important to discuss our targets for Mira Groupware 0.1 so that we can focus on the features which are absolutely necessary for this alpha release. An example of this is whether we should include a synchronisation system or neglect it until 0.2, or how much of a role the Security Layer will play in the next few releases.

I'd also like to discuss Thurston and Alan's latest work on the Client and Server respectively, and assess approximately how much of each application is left to complete for the 0.1 release.

Please reply stating whether you can or cannot make it (or leave your name in the relevant column on the comms page). :)

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org

Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live. Get it now!

Hi Thurston,

That's great! I'm sorry it's so early, but I wasn't aware that you're in PST (you haven't added yet yourself to the team page, hehe!).

If anyone is unsure what time 16:00 UTC is (and thus whether or not they can make the meeting), timeanddate.com's Meeting Planner should prove helpful. :)

Regards,

-Max

I am re-sending this to the list because I don't think it ever arrived. I haven't received any replies and it hasn't shown up in the mailing list archives. How odd...

Anyway, if you can, please read this and think about it before the meeting! :)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: J_K9 <aib.wolphin-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date: 4 Jan 2008 15:58
Subject: Storage Layer and Sync System
To: Mira Development Mailing List <mira-development-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>

Hi all,

First of all, Happy New Year! I hope you've all enjoyed the holidays and wish you (and Mira!) all the best for the coming year.

I was thinking about the sync system and had an idea. This may seem a bit rash, but I think it will bring the 0.1 release date much nearer and also help us to tackle the sync system in steps.

For the 0.1 release, I propose that we have *no synchronisation system*. I know that the whole point of this project is to allow people to communicate and collaborate over a network, but perhaps we should "neuter" this release in order to focus on building the data storage and retrieval system as effectively as possible.

I think we should design and implement a storage system (with version control support, as discussed) for the Mira Client for the 0.1 release and provide two very basic Utilities: Files and Notes. Files will use the version controlled storage and Notes will use the database storage, allowing us to test both modules. The version control system should be implemented baring in mind the fact that the storage system will later be adapted to synchronise with other computers, so it should be designed in such a way that it can be adapted for both client-server and P2P sharing support at a later date.

What I'm essentially saying is that the 0.1 release will be useless. Mira Client will communicate with the Server for authentication, etc, but the synchronisation system will not work. Mira Client will store Workplace data locally and not share it with any other computers. It may disillusion some of us, but I believe that it will set us up perfectly for the next stage, 0.2, in which we can adapt the storage system and its version control functions to operate with other networked Clients via the Server.

What do you think? As an Open Source project, we need to be realistic about our goals and not aim for too much in too short a time because we will not accomplish it. However, if we attack this challenge using a step-by-step approach, I think we will get much further and work more efficiently.

Please discuss this proposal - do you think this is a good idea or a bad one, and why? Is this dumbing down the 0.1 release too much or does it make it a more realistic target for Q2 2008, our original intended release date (which is of course flexible, but if we can focus on a target then our releases should be faster and better)?

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org

I am re-sending this to the list because I don't think it ever arrived. I haven't received any replies and it hasn't shown up in the mailing list archives. How odd...

Anyway, if you can, please read this and think about it before the meeting! :)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: J_K9 <aib.wolphin-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date: 4 Jan 2008 15:58
Subject: Storage Layer and Sync System
To: Mira Development Mailing List < mira-development-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>

Hi all,

First of all, Happy New Year! I hope you've all enjoyed the holidays and wish you (and Mira!) all the best for the coming year.

I was thinking about the sync system and had an idea. This may seem a bit rash, but I think it will bring the 0.1 release date much nearer and also help us to tackle the sync system in steps.

For the 0.1 release, I propose that we have *no synchronisation system*. I know that the whole point of this project is to allow people to communicate and collaborate over a network, but perhaps we should "neuter" this release in order to focus on building the data storage and retrieval system as effectively as possible.

I think we should design and implement a storage system (with version control support, as discussed) for the Mira Client for the 0.1 release and provide two very basic Utilities: Files and Notes. Files will use the version controlled storage and Notes will use the database storage, allowing us to test both modules. The version control system should be implemented baring in mind the fact that the storage system will later be adapted to synchronise with other computers, so it should be designed in such a way that it can be adapted for both client-server and P2P sharing support at a later date.

What I'm essentially saying is that the 0.1 release will be useless. Mira Client will communicate with the Server for authentication, etc, but the synchronisation system will not work. Mira Client will store Workplace data locally and not share it with any other computers. It may disillusion some of us, but I believe that it will set us up perfectly for the next stage, 0.2, in which we can adapt the storage system and its version control functions to operate with other networked Clients via the Server.

What do you think? As an Open Source project, we need to be realistic about our goals and not aim for too much in too short a time because we will not accomplish it. However, if we attack this challenge using a step-by-step approach, I think we will get much further and work more efficiently.

Please discuss this proposal - do you think this is a good idea or a bad one, and why? Is this dumbing down the 0.1 release too much or does it make it a more realistic target for Q2 2008, our original intended release date (which is of course flexible, but if we can focus on a target then our releases should be faster and better)?

Regards,

Max Bossino
Project Manager
http://miragroupware.org