RE: MyHAP ?? (was Protocol questions)

["Ian Lowe" <ianlowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Does anyone have any background on this?  I just went and looked at it
and
while there are
> differences, it looks an awful lot like xPL.

It does, doesn't it?

I don't really have much background to add - I'll go on the record here
that
I don't have information about this that I'm choosing not to disclose.
Frankly, I'm as taken aback as the rest of you.

> I don't begrudge him creating a new protocol, but I can't quite
understand
why a new protocol that is > basically a slight variation of an existing
protocol (that he was involved with) exists?

What rankles so badly for me is that all of things which were
"fiddling"
with xPL... Have been added into his own effort.

> I feel xPL started off as a great idea -- it took the good stuff from
xAP
and was willing to simplify > and nail down details xAP didn't seem to
want
to do (at least when I was there).

xPL in it's origins was really a fork from the 0.9 xAP spec - we went down
the locked down/simple route, whilst xAP gave much greater freedom to the
developer, whilst adding an element of complexity in the process.

> xPL has a lot of power to it as a concept and implementation and
having
gotten myself involved after > a long period of reading and thinking, I
believe it has the ability to be one of the most promising
> and integrative thing to hit HA (especially with some of the recent
discussions involving plugin and
> schema development).

I agree - and it's nice to know that others feel the same way!

> I'm sure he had reasons and I'm hoping someone who might know more
would
share them, or at least
> as much of them as they'd feel comfortable sharing.

Tony's statement over on his new medianet list was :

===

"As I've posted in previous post this is really a "for me
only" thing, I'm
doing as I get a time. If people want to download the software that's up to
them, the protocol isn't open to anyone changing it though. Well they can
change it if they want but I won't be interested in anything they do with
it.

I got totally fed up with xpl (and originally xap) because all I could see
(my point of view of course) is people "fiddling" with it, why
couldn't they
spend that effort creating useful applications instead?

I want a protocol that's set in stone, and that's what I'm creating for my
own use over the next 6 to 12 months"

===

I think the key thing here is "isn't open to anyone changing it".

I think xPL is a good thing - it has some weaknesses, which I have
discussed
frankly with Tony in the past (and annoyingly, have been incorporated into
this "myhap", but were too much hassle to add to xPL!), but on
the whole we
have an incredibly powerful, very simple and accessible protocol here.

I am, however, more than open to people suggesting improvements that can be
implemented without breaking stuff!! I see the rapid hub startup as a good
thing(tm) - adding a version tag into heartbeats - excellent idea! A
diagnostic tool - brilliant!

I see the effort over the last few months as doing exactly that - creating
useful applications. That and, possibly more importantly, clearing the very
minor obstacles in the way of building greater apps across platforms and
environments.

In summary, I don't have the answers.

The only man who truly knows what happened and why is Tony - and he has
chosen to stop receiving email from this list and have nothing whatsoever
to
do with the project. That's a shame, but we are all adults here so hey.
Life
goes on.

Ian.