[aerogear-dev] Suggestion for DataSync roadmap

[Lukáš Fryč]

Hey team,

I've proposed following change to the Conflict Resolution part of the Data
Sync roadmap after recent discussions about Data Sync.

I'm very interested in feedback from all the specific SDK teams, in terms
of whether the whole idea matches the visions you have for Data Sync and
whether we are able to leverage (and/or extend) platform specific tools.


Changes contains following additions:


   - Dec 2014
      - Partial Updates
      - SPDY
   - Jan 2015
      - Batch API


You can read the doc directly here (starting with 0.2.0):

https://github.com/lfryc/aerogear.org/blob/partial-updates-spdy-batches/docs/planning/roadmaps/AeroGearConflictResolution.asciidoc#020-dec-2015-partial-updates-spdy


Please leave any comment right in PR:

https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear.org/pull/386


Thanks!

~ Lukas

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I fine with Google docs or anything else.
>
>
> On 4 September 2014 10:53, Lukáš Fryč <lukas.fryc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yea, I rather meant if we are in brainstorming phase e.g. with Sync spec,
>> I see a fit for rather collaborative solution,
>>
>> but I was mistaken with suggesting oksoclap, because it does not offer
>> that level of interactivity as well. :-)
>>
>>
>> What I meant is sharing a document such as Data Sync Spec on
>> collaborative editor where:
>>
>> * you can suggest additions / modifications
>> * you can comment
>> * comments can be resolved once resolved
>> * that document is owned and maintained by group of people
>>
>> such as Google Docs:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hOsAN5og6dz07-k66ooaGbJ5KrnWJWRyHRelwyjf6bk/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>>
>> But I don't see a point into bringing other technology if it should not
>> help us be more productive, so tell me if I'm mistaken!
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> ~ Lukas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:31 AM, danielbevenius <daniel.bevenius at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Lukas and I talked yesterday and he brought up an issue that it is not as
>>> smooth as it could be to contribute to the roadmap. He instead suggested
>>> to
>>> have a shared docs which I'll later clean up and include in a pull
>>> request.
>>>
>>> The current version can be found here and is in raw asciidoc format:
>>> http://oksoclap.com/p/datasync_roadmap
>>>
>>> Let me know if this works out better.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-Suggestion-for-DataSync-roadmap-tp9006p9114.html
>>> Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140910/c47b4927/attachment.html