2

Given Meteor's support for eventually-consistent offline writes to data objects, automatically merging concurrent edits to the same text field seems like a natural next step. This might be done by integrating some of all of an operational transformation library (list) such as ShareJS.

Is there a desire in the Meteor team to support this functionality in the core product at some point, or would it more likely appear as a third-party add-on module?

Also, since ShareJS actually seems to provide the basic functionality of the Meteor data architecture (they mention in their documentation that it works with arbitrary JSON objects), would it perhaps be possible to do something like Meteor using ShareJS for data syncronization?

Community
  • 1
  • 1
Eric Drechsel
  • 2,694
  • 2
  • 23
  • 24
  • I thought this was a good question, closing this as not constructive is really disruptive. What is with this zero-sum policy? @casperone – Luke Stanley Aug 21 '12 at 00:59
  • Eric, you could use ShareJS to do something like Meteor does, and you might side step some of the things people are waiting on Meteor for like auth and security features, if you wanted to do so. – Luke Stanley Aug 21 '12 at 01:02
  • @LukeStanley This question can only be answered by the Meteor team. This place is not the place to ask those questions. – casperOne Aug 21 '12 at 11:34
  • @casperOne It is an assumption that only the Meteor team would have valuable contributions to the question. This is a good place to ask questions, and it would be better if answers could still be given! Do you understand what I mean by the zero-sum policy? Don't you realise how powerful the community and this wiki-ish technology is? – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 19:51
  • @casperOne in addition, the Meteor team have stated that anyone can add themselves to their team page and submit it as a patch, which they may accept or deny in their branch. – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 19:53
  • @LukeStanley Just because anyone *can* be a member doesn't mean that everyone *is* a member. That said, the crux of the NC closure is this line "Is there a desire in the Meteor team to support this functionality in the core product at some point, or would it more likely appear as a third-party add-on module?" The whole question hinges on that. This is a question to ask support, not on Stack Overflow. Also note, Stack Overflow is only part wiki. The team is encouraged to post here, but not to post one-way information. This is the place for Q&A, and posts have to follow that format. – casperOne Aug 22 '12 at 20:19
  • @casperOne You are still assuming nobody else can provide a useful answer. The question does not hinge on that. Someone could say "actually here is a github branch with that, I just wrote it!" – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 20:21
  • @casperOne surely closing it is even less constructive? I don't understand. – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 20:23
  • @LukeStanley No, it's not, because this is not the place for the Meteor team to post what they think they will prioritize in the future for their project (and or get feedback on it). It's not a ["practical, answerable problem" (as per the FAQ)](http://stackoverflow.com/faq#questions), it's a *discussion*. The purpose of the site is not to foster discussion. – casperOne Aug 22 '12 at 20:28
  • @casperOne That interpretation of the FAQ is not *helpful*, it is pedantic. There could easily be a practical answer someone could give. So what is there to loose by leaving it here? I would love to understand the cost/benefit you see, if you do see any. – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 20:30
  • @LukeStanley Feel free to bring the question of this question's closure up on [meta]; I can assure you though that the FAQ is just a small amount of the nuances that SO adheres to. Call it pedantic if you want, but it's the way it is. If [meta] says this should be open, then so be it, but questions like this do not typically receive support from [meta]. – casperOne Aug 22 '12 at 20:55
  • @casperOne I asked you about the cost benefit and usefulness and you decided not to answer. I'm disappointed. – Luke Stanley Aug 22 '12 at 21:08
  • @LukeStanley The comments are not the place to have a discussion (you should see a link to move the discussion to chat). That said, [meta] is the place to resolve issues such as when you feel questions have been closed improperly. I'll answer you there (or the community will, that's the beauty of Meta). – casperOne Aug 22 '12 at 21:29
  • @LukeStanley Oh, let's not forget that the title alone is *purely speculative*, and therefore not constructive as well. – casperOne Aug 22 '12 at 21:30
  • 1
    meteor provides a [road map](https://trello.com/b/hjBDflxp/meteor-roadmap). OT is on this list as 2 most upvoted in the section Speculative/Future. See [this Question](http://stackoverflow.com/q/11594043/1870254) about how to get it today. – jan-glx May 08 '14 at 10:46

1 Answers1

0

I'm guessing it might be something they might add or could be done with packages.

In the meantime however: You could use Meteor.methods to expose an api to communicate to the same field back and forth. The method could do a diff on the change and merge it to the Collection before returning what should be changed on the clients computer.

jonathanKingston
  • 1,418
  • 10
  • 16