<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On Jun 29, 2007 5:41 PM, Robert O'Callahan <<a href="mailto:robert@ocallahan.org">robert@ocallahan.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="CSS_CV_QUOTED_TEXT_">On 6/30/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Andy Palay</b> <<a href="mailto:ajpalay@google.com" target="_blank">ajpalay@google.com</a>> wrote:</div><div><div class="CSS_CV_QUOTED_TEXT_">
<span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
But it does place a very large burdon on the servers. Google would expect to have quite a few applications and my guess is the last thing we would want is to keep pinging every application to see if it up to date whenever any application is used.
</blockquote></div><div><br>My Google apps currently use <a href="http://mail.google.com" target="_blank">mail.google.com</a>, <a href="http://docs.google.com" target="_blank">docs.google.com</a>, <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com" target="_blank">
picasaweb.google.com</a>
... Calendar uses <a href="http://www.google.com" target="_blank">www.google.com</a>, I don't know why :-) So most of these apps have their own domains, and won't face a problem here. Is it overly burdensome to put separate apps in their own domains?
</div></div></blockquote><div><br>That layout may not be the optimal layout for everyone (even perhaps Google, as it was a choice made before considering offline applications and how they will share information, etc.). The desire to share data and code could lead people to put all apps under a sigle domain.
<br><br>As for the burden to put apps in their own domain - First it seems to be an unnecessary requirement. I build an app, I choose a URL as I normally would and I would hope everthing would work out fine. Second it doesn't work well for environments where access to the domain is not possible. Consider the case of internal corporate apps. People post new web apps using their 'individual' internal corporate web server. They can choose whatever name they want. What they don't have is access to the domain in order to do this. I grant that this scenario is currently not well supported by the Gear's security model (something that I believe will need to change), but it is a real use of technology.
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div><br><br>If it is, then I would suggest simply allowing consistency to be partitioned by directory as well. I'm not sure of the best way for the server to configure that, though.
<br></div><div class="CSS_CV_QUOTED_TEXT_"></div></div></blockquote><div><br>I'm still not sure why not have consistency enforced at the application level. This way an application can pull code from whereever it needs to regardless of the directory structure.
<br></div><br>Andy<br><br></div><br>