Re: Proposing libgdata as a new desktop module



On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 19:22 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> Lets not fall into the lazy trap of pretending that because something
> is no-cost that it is effectively the same as being libre-free (or
> even the same as being pragmatically open.)

I didn't mean to suggest any of Google's services were libre-free; I was
merely saying that they're free-as-in-beer and a lot more
well-documented than other protocols. Bad wording on my part.

> Or to put it a different way: feel free to argue for it as a necessary
> evil; that has been and will continue to be the kind of compromise
> that GNOME has to make sometimes. But please don't pretend that
> because it is no-cost that that somehow makes it OK.

I personally think that Google's services are fine; a "necessary evil",
if you will. They may not be libre-free, but they're in wide use, and
having access to Google services from the desktop will consequently be
useful to many people.

> Specifically to this point, things like flash and other codecs that we
> have worked out support for are broadly used by hundreds of thousands
> (millions?) of people and data providers. gdata... not so much. So
> work with me here:
> 
> * is there any reason to believe that there is a trend towards
> adoption here that we should be aware of? In other words, is this soon
> going to be well beyond Google, and we should be ready for it? that
> would be a good argument here; that's basically why we're OK with
> libswf. Data points that one might muster to prove this would include
> that open source CMSs (or other open source web-based software) has
> libraries or plugins that publish gdata endpoints.

If GData is adopted well beyond Google's services, I think it will take
a while. I've just trawled the web for examples of non-Google services
which publish GData APIs, and all I could find were these:
* http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/GdataServer
* http://drupal.org/node/60490
both of which look dead. There were a few attempts to revive the Drupal
GData project in 2008; I don't know what became of them.

> * if it isn't going to spread beyond google (or we have no reason to
> believe so, at any rate) is there a reason to think that google is
> special/important enough that we should compromise our values here? Is
> there a good tactical reason for it? (I'd say that this, roughly, is
> our relationship to SMB.) (There may be; I'm open to that possibility
> but don't see it argued for yet.)

As I said above, Google services are very widely used, but I can't speak
for everyone and say whether that's a good enough reason for adoption.
Obviously there have been a few people giving unconditional +1s to
moving libgdata into the desktop set; but there have also been the same
number raising concerns such as yours.

> * alternately, are there ways to make this more general and support
> alternatives? In other words, should this be a general purpose
> web-data library (perhaps an atompub library?) in which gdata is but
> one mode? Should it be integrated with some other, pre-existing
> network connection or data protocol library?

In its current state, it would take quite some work to make libgdata
more generalised, if it would work at all. I haven't really looked into
other web APIs enough to be able to say whether a general approach would
work sufficiently well.

Regards,
Philip

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]