I had been a keen user of Stream version 1, and was vocal (including on WP Tavern) with my criticism of the move to a cloud-based model. I was particularly critical of the way in which that transition was handled, and of the fact that the new model meant that users of the service in the EU would be acting illegally.

The second criticism was met, by apparent "friends" and "supporters" of the Stream developers, with disdain. I was over-estimating the problem, they said; Frankie and the team were "good guys" (as if I ever doubted that); and few users would be concerned about such technicalities. Beware such friends. They are expensive.

To their credit, the Stream developers themselves did not respond in that fashion. They said, more-or-less, that they thought they had everything planned out well enough, although it would be a shame to lose users in the EU....

Unfortunately, it now seems that the Stream team hadn't considered the EU law issue at all when they made the transition. Luke Carbis writes on his Stream blog: "Did you know that in some parts of the EU the storage of personal information on foreign servers is illegal?"

So the transitional to Stream 2.0 was probably doomed from the start. But that doesn't mean either the original concept or the code itself was poor. Although I was critical of the move to Stream 2.0, I am sorry that money was lost, and I think it's great that Luke and Frankie have been able to muster up both the enthusiasm and the backing to create Stream 3.0 and return the plugin to its roots. I shall certainly be trying out the latest version.

Even more important to me is that, as Luke writes: "I don’t want to make the same mistake as we did with Stream 2. So this time, I’d like your input."

But it's not just the Stream team who need to reflect on this episode. Cheering on friends from the sidelines while they hurtle headlong into trouble does no-one any good. Encouraging a climate of due diligence, on the other hand, is to everyone's benefit.