Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Maybe first build a capable editor, with plugins, etc (xi-editor is not that yet) and worry about "collaborative editing" later?

And even for that, I think simply "taking turns" (where users share an editor session, can chat with each other, and can switch on sequentially who gets to actively edit) is enough for 99% of cases, and is not more difficult than mere single-person editing (since there are no conflicts).




Collaborative editing is very difficult to implement in a pre-existing codebase. Decisions made during the initial design will be prohibitive to just bolting on collaborative editing in the future.

To me, xi seems like an aspirational project, so this seems like the perfect place to take some time and design for these features up front.


I think (from reading the documentation) an implicit aim of Fuchsia is to treat a device no longer as a holder of documents (a storage medium for photos / messages / candy crush scores) but as a view into a universal storage space.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:S9poew...


Collaborative editing is not something you can just bolt on after the fact if you want it to actually work well. Things like building a robust server that can be exposed to the internet can certainly wait, but how you are you supposed to develop a plugin ecosystem when you haven't even settled on a conceptual model for how to store and manipulate text yet?


>Collaborative editing is not something you can just bolt on after the fact if you want it to actually work well.

Yes, but my comment also alludes to the opinion that "well working collaborative editing" is not a real problem people have, and a much easier (and easier to bolt on) use case, of consecutive (serialized with "locks") collaborative editing should cover most people's needs...


Start by redoing everything that the mature alternatives do is an advice for creating neither successful not useful things.

By all means, focus on creating a kick-ass collaborative editor, and add just the editing capabilities needed to make it good at collaborative editing.


>Start by redoing everything that the mature alternatives do is an advice for creating neither successful not useful things.

It's the best advice in order to see any update.

There are plenty of programs that do some unique things very well, but fail on doing "everything that the mature alternatives do", so they fail to ever get mainstream traction themselves.

People want a complete solution that ALSO does X unique thing, if they are to drop their existing editors. Not something that they'll have to use alongside them for that special case.

(Joel on Software has written some nice posts about this idea, and why "minimal" competitors, who don't do "everything that the mature alternatives do" frequently fail, though I can't find the link right now)


Without at least doing at least one thing substantially better what is your chance of getting used by anyone.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: