* Matrix communication protocol.
@ 2020-07-23 21:56 Msavoritias
[not found] ` <87eep1bw5k.fsf@gmail.com>
2020-07-24 14:47 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-23 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1637 bytes --]
Hi,
I recently started to become involved in GNU and FSF by installing also
Guix on system. I am part of the Guix Channel on Matrix.
I created three channels on my server privacytools.io I know that there
are some GNU channels on the matrix.org server but I went forth with
creating one on my server. First for Decentralization reasons.
Matrix.org is the biggest server. And second matrix.org is slow due to
the number of users there.
I noticed that there are a lot of GNU projects already there. Some of
them are GUIX, Octave, Gnunet, a lot of GNU channels, Linux Libre and
so forth.
Also I noticed that it is in the roadmap for Guix to have all the
Matrix packages in the repositories. Which a lot of them are already
there.
The benefits to me are first its a modern protocol with a lot of
features. I know not everybody will want all these features though so
we can always set up an IRC bridge to talk with people on the gnu IRC
server.
Second a lot of new users nowdays expect modern tooling and
communication. I think integrating a Matrix server will be a great way
to accomodate them. In a sense it will improve onboarding of new
contributors. Granted we have a long way to go with that in my opinion,
but Matrix is the first piece of the puzzle towards a bigger and more
liveful FSF.
Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary client.
MSavoritias
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 1706 bytes --]
Hi,
I recently started to become involved in GNU and FSF by installing also
Guix on system. I am part of the Guix Channel on Matrix.
I created three channels on my server privacytools.io I know that there
are some GNU channels on the matrix.org server but I went forth with
creating one on my server. First for Decentralization reasons.
Matrix.org is the biggest server. And second matrix.org is slow due to
the number of users there.
I noticed that there are a lot of GNU projects already there. Some of
them are GUIX, Octave, Gnunet, a lot of GNU channels, Linux Libre and
so forth.
Also I noticed that it is in the roadmap for Guix to have all the
Matrix packages in the repositories. Which a lot of them are already
there.
The benefits to me are first its a modern protocol with a lot of
features. I know not everybody will want all these features though so
we can al ways set up an IRC bridge to talk with people on the gnu IRC
server.
Second a lot of new users nowdays expect modern tooling and
communication. I think integrating a Matrix server will be a great way
to accomodate them. In a sense it will improve onboarding of new
contributors. Granted we have a long way to go with that in my opinion,
but Matrix is the first piece of the puzzle towards a bigger and more
liveful FSF.
Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
client.
MSavoritias
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
[not found] ` <87eep1bw5k.fsf@gmail.com>
@ 2020-07-24 8:37 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-25 7:07 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-24 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Sandoval; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1255 bytes --]
Hi,
That was my assumption too. Especially as there is a request for
packaging riot in the Guix Libreplanet page.
From what I have heard it is basically the non-free addons and the
Google Captca that seems to be the problem.
The first is just a site that we don't have to connect or remove stuff
from there.
The second one they are working towards replacing it and I think we
could patch it and remove it if needed.
Regards
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 19:21, Jonathan Sandoval
<cloudneozero@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Msavoritias writes:
>
>> Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
>> Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
>>
>> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
>> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
>> Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
>> client.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I was curious about you saying that Riot is not free software. I just
> checked their repository in github and it uses the Apache License. I'm
> working as a consultor for a company that it's building its product
> using Matrix (synaps) and Riot, and I though both of them were free
> (as
> in freedom) software with a permissive license.
> --
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 1268 bytes --]
Hi,
That was my assumption too. Especially as there is a request for
packaging riot in the Guix Libreplanet page.
From what I have heard it is basically the non-free addons and the
Google Captca that seems to be the problem.
The first is just a site that we don't have to connect or remove stuff
from there.
The second one they are working towards replacing it and I think we
could patch it and remove it if needed.
Regards
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 19:21, Jonathan Sandoval
<cloudneozero@gmail.com> wrote:
Msavoritias writes:
Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody. I would like to ask
is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU server in the future?
Are there any blockers I can help with? Disclaimer: I am NOT saying
to use Riot or any other proprietary client.
Hi, I was curious about you saying that Riot is not free software. I
just checked their repository in github and it uses the Apache License.
I'm working as a consultor for a company that it's building its product
using Matrix (synaps) and Riot, and I though both of them were free (as
in freedom) software with a permissive license. --
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-23 21:56 Matrix communication protocol Msavoritias
[not found] ` <87eep1bw5k.fsf@gmail.com>
@ 2020-07-24 14:47 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-07-29 16:25 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss @ 2020-07-24 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5980 bytes --]
Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU.
Em 23/07/2020 18:56, Msavoritias escreveu:
> Guix on system. I am part of the Guix Channel on Matrix.> […]
> I created three channels on my server privacytools.io I know that there
> are some GNU channels on the matrix.org server but I went forth with
> […]
> I noticed that there are a lot of GNU projects already there. Some of
> them are GUIX, Octave, Gnunet, a lot of GNU channels, Linux Libre and
> so forth.
On the subject of channels/rooms, please make sure that these are pure
Matrix channels by checking the full address, since last time I tried
(many years ago) with purple-matrix, Matrix itself doesn't tell that
very easily. Also, make sure that the official pages of the projects
advertise these channels, if not, they might not be official.
> creating one on my server. First for Decentralization reasons.
> Matrix.org is the biggest server. And second matrix.org is slow due to
> the number of users there.
> we can al ways set up an IRC bridge to talk with people on the gnu IRC
> server.
Setting up a bridge means allocating a separate part of the server to
talk to those protocols. How this communication is made (if a guest
account is created for every person or if each of them have to manually
set their own account in case the IRC network has rules to only allow
participation of registered people) is another set of issues. The best
option I know of thus far, which also helps non-experienced and
unregistered users although possibly having some limitations on which
IRC features will be available, is to set a bot to serve as a message
relay back and forth between the target channels. Disregarding the
message relay bot solution, Matrix's bridge services seem to be similar
to XMPP's. As for the bot, as a Free Software Directory
reviewer/evaluator, I saw a submission (still unapproved) for one such
tools, which I'm trying to review as of today.
> Second a lot of new users nowdays expect modern tooling and
> communication. I think integrating a Matrix server will be a great way
Indeed but, let's not forget that the means of communication and data
interoperability/exchange that are still stable as of today succeeded in
such a way thanks to one specific kind of standardization that was the
norm before the growth of the Californian ideology past 2000 (i.e.: the
term coined by Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, not to be confused
with beliefs of a random person from California). The standard in
question which resisted is called "open standard", not because it simply
came from a free/libre and "open source" software project, but because
it was/is approved by a national or international standards
body/collective/workgroup — e.g.: internationally we have many
organizations, including W3C, IETF, ISO, XSF. These standards bodies
often accept members from different groups so as to make sure that
everyone has a chance to participate.
These "open standards" can of course be obsolete or not reflect a new
scenario that arose, this is why the members of the bodies can
occasionally call on the others to make updated versions, which in most
cases, even if approved, are in no way immediately mandatory.
However, when it involves standards "auto-regulated" by their own
projects, we will occasionally see lots of anomalies, such as: new
versions being approved as mandatory very fast and thus breaking
software which, despite being updated, still implement the old version;
and other group of people making and following a partially compatible
parallel standard branched from the original (e.g.: original Markdown,
GitLab/GitHub Markdown, BibTex, BibLaTeX, abnTeX2, abnTeX2cite,
BibLaTeX-ABNT).
It must be noted that even if "open standards" suffer from these
anomalies — e.g.: WhatsApp which was a XMPP service provider too big
(because many people recommended it instead of pointing to either a
"XMPP server list" or a local provider), and so made "FunXMPP" which
embraced XMPP, extended it, and extinguished XMPP communications); and
the many non-conforming CSV and vCard implementations —, the original
reference is not lost and the revision approval has clearly defined process.
The failure to keep those means of data exchange standardized and
interoperable opens space to the abuses described in [1].
> Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
> Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
> […]
> Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
> client.
The only free/libre one I have heard so far is purple-matrix for libpurple.
> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members.
# References
[1]:
<https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm>,
under CC-BY-SA-3.0-US, according to
<https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/>.
--
* Ativista do software livre
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
* Software (Free Software Directory)
* Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
* Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
* Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
* Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
* Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
* Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
* Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
* Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
* Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
* XMPP com OMEMO
* E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-24 8:37 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-07-25 7:07 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) @ 2020-07-25 7:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1532 bytes --]
Hi,
I can add that riot for desktop is built on top of Electron, which is non free.
Librement,
Le 24 juillet 2020 10:37:14 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
>Hi,
>
>That was my assumption too. Especially as there is a request for
>packaging riot in the Guix Libreplanet page.
> From what I have heard it is basically the non-free addons and the
>Google Captca that seems to be the problem.
>The first is just a site that we don't have to connect or remove stuff
>from there.
>The second one they are working towards replacing it and I think we
>could patch it and remove it if needed.
>
>Regards
>MSavoritias
>
>On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 19:21, Jonathan Sandoval
><cloudneozero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Msavoritias writes:
>>
>>> Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
>>> Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
>>>
>>> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
>>> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
>>> Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
>>> client.
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was curious about you saying that Riot is not free software. I just
>> checked their repository in github and it uses the Apache License. I'm
>> working as a consultor for a company that it's building its product
>> using Matrix (synaps) and Riot, and I though both of them were free
>> (as
>> in freedom) software with a permissive license.
>> --
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 1481 bytes --]
Hi,
I can add that riot for desktop is built on top of Electron, which is
non free.
Librement,
Le 24 juillet 2020 10:37:14 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
<marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
Hi,
That was my assumption too. Especially as there is a request for
packaging riot in the Guix Libreplanet page.
From what I have heard it is basically the non-free addons and the
Google Captca that seems to be the problem.
The first is just a site that we don't have to connect or remove stuff
from there.
The second one they are working towards replacing it and I think we
could patch it and remove it if needed.
Regards
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 19:21, Jonathan Sandoval
<cloudneozero@gmail.com> wrote:
Msavoritias writes:
Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
client.
Hi,
I was curious about you saying that Riot is not free software. I
just
checked their repository in github and it uses the Apache License.
I'm
working as a consultor for a company that it's building its product
using Matrix (synaps) and Riot, and I though both of them were free
(as
in freedom) software with a permissive license.
--
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-24 14:47 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
@ 2020-07-29 16:25 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 4:37 ` Denver Gingerich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-29 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adonay Felipe Nogueira; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7995 bytes --]
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
> Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU.
>
> Em 23/07/2020 18:56, Msavoritias escreveu:
>> Guix on system. I am part of the Guix Channel on Matrix.>
>> […]
>> I created three channels on my server privacytools.io I know
>> that there
>> are some GNU channels on the matrix.org server but I went forth
>> with
>> […]
>> I noticed that there are a lot of GNU projects already there.
>> Some of
>> them are GUIX, Octave, Gnunet, a lot of GNU channels, Linux
>> Libre and
>> so forth.
>
> On the subject of channels/rooms, please make sure that these are pure
> Matrix channels by checking the full address, since last time I tried
> (many years ago) with purple-matrix, Matrix itself doesn't tell that
> very easily. Also, make sure that the official pages of the projects
> advertise these channels, if not, they might not be official.
Fair point. From what I can see there are some that are basically IRC
bridged channels and some that are native.
But they don't seem to be advertised so they are unofficial.
>
>> creating one on my server. First for Decentralization reasons.
>> Matrix.org is the biggest server. And second matrix.org is slow
>> due to
>> the number of users there.
>
>> we can al ways set up an IRC bridge to talk with people on the
>> gnu IRC
>> server.
>
> Setting up a bridge means allocating a separate part of the server to
> talk to those protocols. How this communication is made (if a guest
> account is created for every person or if each of them have to
> manually
> set their own account in case the IRC network has rules to only allow
> participation of registered people) is another set of issues. The best
> option I know of thus far, which also helps non-experienced and
> unregistered users although possibly having some limitations on which
> IRC features will be available, is to set a bot to serve as a message
> relay back and forth between the target channels. Disregarding the
> message relay bot solution, Matrix's bridge services seem to be
> similar
> to XMPP's. As for the bot, as a Free Software Directory
> reviewer/evaluator, I saw a submission (still unapproved) for one such
> tools, which I'm trying to review as of today.
>
>> Second a lot of new users nowdays expect modern tooling and
>> communication. I think integrating a Matrix server will be a
>> great way
>
> Indeed but, let's not forget that the means of communication and data
> interoperability/exchange that are still stable as of today succeeded
> in
> such a way thanks to one specific kind of standardization that was the
> norm before the growth of the Californian ideology past 2000 (i.e.:
> the
> term coined by Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, not to be confused
> with beliefs of a random person from California). The standard in
> question which resisted is called "open standard", not because it
> simply
> came from a free/libre and "open source" software project, but because
> it was/is approved by a national or international standards
> body/collective/workgroup — e.g.: internationally we have many
> organizations, including W3C, IETF, ISO, XSF. These standards bodies
> often accept members from different groups so as to make sure that
> everyone has a chance to participate.
That all sounds great in theory. But in practise from my experience the
W3C is controlled by Google basically with the browser monopoly they
have. And POSIX and other stuff have been holding innovation back. That
happens because of the resistanse to change and the slow beraucracy of
the process.
I think we should look into finding striking a better balance between
standartization and innovation and also having Standard bodies that
actually listen to everybody.
>
> These "open standards" can of course be obsolete or not reflect a new
> scenario that arose, this is why the members of the bodies can
> occasionally call on the others to make updated versions, which in
> most
> cases, even if approved, are in no way immediately mandatory.
>
> However, when it involves standards "auto-regulated" by their own
> projects, we will occasionally see lots of anomalies, such as: new
> versions being approved as mandatory very fast and thus breaking
> software which, despite being updated, still implement the old
> version;
> and other group of people making and following a partially compatible
> parallel standard branched from the original (e.g.: original Markdown,
> GitLab/GitHub Markdown, BibTex, BibLaTeX, abnTeX2, abnTeX2cite,
> BibLaTeX-ABNT).
>
> It must be noted that even if "open standards" suffer from these
> anomalies — e.g.: WhatsApp which was a XMPP service provider too big
> (because many people recommended it instead of pointing to either a
> "XMPP server list" or a local provider), and so made "FunXMPP" which
> embraced XMPP, extended it, and extinguished XMPP communications); and
> the many non-conforming CSV and vCard implementations —, the
> original
> reference is not lost and the revision approval has clearly defined
> process.
>
> The failure to keep those means of data exchange standardized and
> interoperable opens space to the abuses described in [1].
It does and I'm not disagreeing with you. But, a lot of the time the
commitees a lot of the time are so strict to change and so slow a lot
of contributors don't even try to propose stuff.
We need to seriously modernize how standards are used and implemented
if you ask me. But that is not the discussion at hand.
>
>> Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
>> Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody.
>> […]
>> Disclaimer: I am NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary
>> client.
>
> The only free/libre one I have heard so far is purple-matrix for
> libpurple.
There is also an emacs client but it has lagged behind a little bit.
>
>> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official
>> FSF/GNU
>> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
>
> FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members.
I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I didn't see
the same features in all the clients I tried and almost all of them
were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing people to use
XMPP.
>
>
> # References
>
>
> [1]:
> <<https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm>>,
> under CC-BY-SA-3.0-US, according to
> <<https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/>>.
>
>
> --
> * Ativista do software livre
> * <https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno>
> * Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
> * Software (Free Software Directory)
> * Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
> * Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
> * Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
> * Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
> * Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
> * Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
> * Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
> * Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
> * Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
> * Ao enviar anexos
> * Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
> * Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
> * Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
> * Vide endereço anterior
> * Mensagens secretas somente via
> * XMPP com OMEMO
> * E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 8024 bytes --]
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
Msavoritias escreveu:
Guix on system. I am part of the Guix Channel on Matrix.> […] I
created three channels on my server privacytools.io I know that
there are some GNU channels on the matrix.org server but I went
forth with […] I noticed that there are a lot of GNU projects
already there. Some of them are GUIX, Octave, Gnunet, a lot of GNU
channels, Linux Libre and so forth.
On the subject of channels/rooms, please make sure that these are pure
Matrix channels by checking the full address, since last time I tried
(many years ago) with purple-matrix, Matrix itself doesn't tell that
very easily. Also, make sure that the official pages of the projects
advertise these channels, if not, they might not be official.
Fair point. From what I can see there are some that are basically IRC
bridged channels and some that are native.
But they don't seem to be advertised so they are unofficial.
creating one on my server. First for Decentralization reasons.
Matrix.org is the biggest server. And second matrix.org is slow due
to the number of users there.
we can al ways set up an IRC bridge to talk with people on the gnu
IRC server.
Setting up a bridge means allocating a separate part of the server to
talk to those protocols. How this communication is made (if a guest
account is created for every person or if each of them have to manually
set their own account in case the IRC network has rules to only allow
participation of registered people) is another set of issues. The best
option I know of thus far, which also helps non-experienced and
unregistered users although possibly having some limitations on which
IRC features will be available, is to set a bot to serve as a message
relay back and forth between the target channels. Disregarding the
message relay bot solution, Matrix's bridge services seem to be similar
to XMPP's. As for the bot, as a Free Software Directory
reviewer/evaluator, I saw a submission (still unapproved) for one such
tools, which I'm trying to review as of today.
Second a lot of new users nowdays expect modern tooling and
communication. I think integrating a Matrix server will be a great
way
Indeed but, let's not forget that the means of communication and data
interoperability/exchange that are still stable as of today succeeded
in such a way thanks to one specific kind of standardization that was
the norm before the growth of the Californian ideology past 2000 (i.e.:
the term coined by Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, not to be
confused with beliefs of a random person from California). The standard
in question which resisted is called "open standard", not because it
simply came from a free/libre and "open source" software project, but
because it was/is approved by a national or international standards
body/collective/workgroup — e.g.: internationally we have many
organizations, including W3C, IETF, ISO, XSF. These standards bodies
often accept members from different groups so as to make sure that
everyone has a chance to participate.
That all sounds great in theory. But in practise from my experience the
W3C is controlled by Google basically with the browser monopoly they
have. And POSIX and other stuff have been holding innovation back. That
happens because of the resistanse to change and the slow beraucracy of
the process.
I think we should look into finding striking a better balance between
standartization and innovation and also having Standard bodies that
actually listen to everybody.
These "open standards" can of course be obsolete or not reflect a new
scenario that arose, this is why the members of the bodies can
occasionally call on the others to make updated versions, which in most
cases, even if approved, are in no way immediately mandatory. However,
when it involves standards "auto-regulated" by their own projects, we
will occasionally see lots of anomalies, such as: new versions being
approved as mandatory very fast and thus breaking software which,
despite being updated, still implement the old version; and other group
of people making and following a partially compatible parallel standard
branched from the original (e.g.: original Markdown, GitLab/GitHub
Markdown, BibTex, BibLaTeX, abnTeX2, abnTeX2cite, BibLaTeX-ABNT). It
must be noted that even if "open standards" suffer from these anomalies
— e.g.: WhatsApp which was a XMPP service provider too big (because
many people recommended it instead of pointing to either a "XMPP server
list" or a local provider), and so made "FunXMPP" which embraced XMPP,
extended it, and extinguished XMPP communications); and the many
non-conforming CSV and vCard implementations —, the original reference
is not lost and the revision approval has clearly defined process. The
failure to keep those means of data exchange standardized and
interoperable opens space to the abuses described in [1].
It does and I'm not disagreeing with you. But, a lot of the time the
commitees a lot of the time are so strict to change and so slow a lot
of contributors don't even try to propose stuff.
We need to seriously modernize how standards are used and implemented
if you ask me. But that is not the discussion at hand.
Also I think having a bunch of semi-official channel using
Non-FreeSoftware like Riot does't help anybody. […] Disclaimer: I am
NOT saying to use Riot or any other proprietary client.
The only free/libre one I have heard so far is purple-matrix for
libpurple.
There is also an emacs client but it has lagged behind a little bit.
I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members.
I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I didn't see
the same features in all the clients I tried and almost all of them
were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing people to use
XMPP.
# References [1]:
<[1]https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.web
m>, under CC-BY-SA-3.0-US, according to
<[2]https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/>.
--
* Ativista do software livre *
[3]https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno * Membro dos grupos
avaliadores de * Software (Free Software Directory) * Distribuições de
sistemas (FreedSoftware) * Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team) * Não
sou advogado e não fomento os não livres * Sempre veja o spam/lixo
eletrônico do teu e-mail * Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de
entrada * Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP * Chave pública: vide
endereço anterior * Qualquer outro pode ser fraude * Se não tens
OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc" * Ao enviar anexos * Docs.,
planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument * Outros tipos: vide
endereço anterior * Use protocolos de comunicação federadas * Vide
endereço anterior * Mensagens secretas somente via * XMPP com OMEMO *
E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [4]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[5]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm
2. https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/
3. https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
4. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
5. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-29 16:25 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-07-30 4:37 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-04 13:16 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Denver Gingerich @ 2020-07-30 4:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Msavoritias; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
> libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
>
> Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
> Msavoritias escreveu:
>
> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official FSF/GNU
> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
>
> FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members.
>
> I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I didn't see
> the same features in all the clients I tried and almost all of them
> were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing people to use
> XMPP.
Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And which clients did you try?
I believe there should be better resources to allow people to more easily find the best XMPP clients - I'm trying to do my part with the recommendations at https://jmp.chat/#clients (for the free software service I run). In short, use Gajim or Conversations. If you want fancy design but less features, then Dino.
Hopefully we can make these recommendations more widely-known so that people don't give up on XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is very easy to use and featureful if you have the right client.
Denver
https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 4:37 ` Denver Gingerich
@ 2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 16:21 ` Ali Reza Hayati
2020-07-30 16:27 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-08-04 13:16 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-30 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denver Gingerich; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2596 bytes --]
Dino is not available for Android it seems though. On desktop there are
choices.
I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and Fdroid
but couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or otherwise.
I understand that tech people don't care about UI/UX but we need some
nice looking clients.
Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech
people.
IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been popular
by now.
And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to message
my self.
Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free
Software (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by the
wider community. Also the clients seem to decently designed.
I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free Software
users, like it or not we need a good presentation with good interface.
otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity.
No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 04:37, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
>> libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
>> Msavoritias escreveu:
>>
>> I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official
>> FSF/GNU
>> server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help with?
>>
>> FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members.
>>
>> I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I didn't
>> see
>> the same features in all the clients I tried and almost all of
>> them
>> were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing people to
>> use
>> XMPP.
>
> Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And which
> clients did you try?
>
> I believe there should be better resources to allow people to more
> easily find the best XMPP clients - I'm trying to do my part with the
> recommendations at <https://jmp.chat/#clients> (for the free software
> service I run). In short, use Gajim or Conversations. If you want
> fancy design but less features, then Dino.
>
> Hopefully we can make these recommendations more widely-known so that
> people don't give up on XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is very
> easy to use and featureful if you have the right client.
>
> Denver
> <https://jmp.chat/>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 2647 bytes --]
Dino is not available for Android it seems though. On desktop there are
choices.
I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and Fdroid
but couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or otherwise.
I understand that tech people don't care about UI/UX but we need some
nice looking clients.
Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech
people.
IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been popular
by now.
And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to message
my self.
Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free
Software (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by the
wider community. Also the clients seem to decently designed.
I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free Software
users, like it or not we need a good presentation with good interface.
otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity.
No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 04:37, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
libreplanet-discuss <[1]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
Msavoritias escreveu: I would like to ask is it in the works to have
an official FSF/GNU server in the future? Are there any blockers I
can help with? FSF already has XMPP service for their associate
members. I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I
didn't see the same features in all the clients I tried and almost
all of them were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing
people to use XMPP.
Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And which
clients did you try? I believe there should be better resources to
allow people to more easily find the best XMPP clients - I'm trying to
do my part with the recommendations at [2]https://jmp.chat/#clients
(for the free software service I run). In short, use Gajim or
Conversations. If you want fancy design but less features, then Dino.
Hopefully we can make these recommendations more widely-known so that
people don't give up on XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is very
easy to use and featureful if you have the right client. Denver
[3]https://jmp.chat/
References
1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
2. https://jmp.chat/#clients
3. https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-07-30 16:21 ` Ali Reza Hayati
2020-07-30 19:30 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 16:27 ` Denver Gingerich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Ali Reza Hayati @ 2020-07-30 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3389 bytes --]
If you ever considered using Riot (newly renamed to Element), please
note that Riot/Element has Electron and Electron is considered nonfree.
Electron has Chromium in it but it doesn't include all licenses of
Chromium so it's a violation of software freedom.
On 7/30/20 8:34 PM, Msavoritias wrote:
> Dino is not available for Android it seems though. On desktop there are
> choices.
> I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and Fdroid
> but couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or otherwise.
> I understand that tech people don't care about UI/UX but we need some
> nice looking clients.
> Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech
> people.
> IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been popular
> by now.
> And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to message
> my self.
> Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free
> Software (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by the
> wider community. Also the clients seem to decently designed.
> I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free Software
> users, like it or not we need a good presentation with good interface.
> otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity.
> No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
> MSavoritias
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 04:37, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
> libreplanet-discuss <[1]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
> Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
> Msavoritias escreveu: I would like to ask is it in the works to have
> an official FSF/GNU server in the future? Are there any blockers I
> can help with? FSF already has XMPP service for their associate
> members. I guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I
> didn't see the same features in all the clients I tried and almost
> all of them were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing
> people to use XMPP.
>
> Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And which
> clients did you try? I believe there should be better resources to
> allow people to more easily find the best XMPP clients - I'm trying to
> do my part with the recommendations at [2]https://jmp.chat/#clients
> (for the free software service I run). In short, use Gajim or
> Conversations. If you want fancy design but less features, then Dino.
> Hopefully we can make these recommendations more widely-known so that
> people don't give up on XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is very
> easy to use and featureful if you have the right client. Denver
> [3]https://jmp.chat/
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> 2. https://jmp.chat/#clients
> 3. https://jmp.chat/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
>
--
Ali Reza Hayati <hayati@riseup.net>
www.alirezahayati.com
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 16:21 ` Ali Reza Hayati
@ 2020-07-30 16:27 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-30 19:51 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Denver Gingerich @ 2020-07-30 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Msavoritias; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
> I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and Fdroid but
> couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or otherwise.
What is wrong with Conversations?
https://f-droid.org/app/eu.siacs.conversations
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.siacs.conversations
> Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech people.
> IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been popular by
> now.
> And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to message my
> self.
> Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free Software
> (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by the wider community.
XMPP is also actively developed and has many free software implementations (including some that are AGPLv3, like https://jmp.chat/ ).
If you want/need a gratis account that supports all the important features, see https://dismail.de/register.html .
> Also the clients seem to decently designed.
See above - is there something Conversations is missing versus the Matrix client(s) for Android?
> I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free Software users,
> like it or not we need a good presentation with good interface. otherwise we
> risk to fall into obscurity.
> No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
I definitely agree. However, I think we need to look at which protocols are likely to stand the test of time. Matrix is very new, and the server implementation(s?) is extremely resource-heavy. XMPP has been around for over 20 years and has multiple lightweight server implementations.
Denver
https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 16:21 ` Ali Reza Hayati
@ 2020-07-30 19:30 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-30 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ali Reza Hayati; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4142 bytes --]
I am well aware. Personally I rejected it because its not Copyleft.
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 20:51, Ali Reza Hayati <hayati@riseup.net>
wrote:
> If you ever considered using Riot (newly renamed to Element), please
> note that Riot/Element has Electron and Electron is considered
> nonfree.
>
> Electron has Chromium in it but it doesn't include all licenses of
> Chromium so it's a violation of software freedom.
>
> On 7/30/20 8:34 PM, Msavoritias wrote:
>> Dino is not available for Android it seems though. On desktop
>> there are
>> choices.
>> I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and
>> Fdroid
>> but couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or
>> otherwise.
>> I understand that tech people don't care about UI/UX but we need
>> some
>> nice looking clients.
>> Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for
>> non-tech
>> people.
>> IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been
>> popular
>> by now.
>> And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to
>> message
>> my self.
>> Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free
>> Software (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by
>> the
>> wider community. Also the clients seem to decently designed.
>> I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free
>> Software
>> users, like it or not we need a good presentation with good
>> interface.
>> otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity.
>> No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
>> MSavoritias
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 04:37, Denver Gingerich
>> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
>> libreplanet-discuss <[1]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>> wrote:
>> Note: I don't speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56,
>> Msavoritias escreveu: I would like to ask is it in the works
>> to have
>> an official FSF/GNU server in the future? Are there any
>> blockers I
>> can help with? FSF already has XMPP service for their associate
>> members. I guess it comes down to personal preference but for
>> me I
>> didn't see the same features in all the clients I tried and
>> almost
>> all of them were badly designed. This doesn't help with
>> convincing
>> people to use XMPP.
>>
>> Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And
>> which
>> clients did you try? I believe there should be better resources
>> to
>> allow people to more easily find the best XMPP clients - I'm
>> trying to
>> do my part with the recommendations at
>> [2]<https://jmp.chat/#clients>
>> (for the free software service I run). In short, use Gajim or
>> Conversations. If you want fancy design but less features, then
>> Dino.
>> Hopefully we can make these recommendations more widely-known so
>> that
>> people don't give up on XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is
>> very
>> easy to use and featureful if you have the right client. Denver
>> [3]<https://jmp.chat/>
>>
>> References
>>
>> 1. <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
>> 2. <https://jmp.chat/#clients>
>> 3. <https://jmp.chat/>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
>> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
>>
>
> --
> Ali Reza Hayati <hayati@riseup.net <mailto:hayati@riseup.net>>
> www.alirezahayati.com <http://www.alirezahayati.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 4239 bytes --]
I am well aware. Personally I rejected it because its not Copyleft.
MSavoritias
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 20:51, Ali Reza Hayati <hayati@riseup.net>
wrote:
If you ever considered using Riot (newly renamed to Element), please
note that Riot/Element has Electron and Electron is considered nonfree.
Electron has Chromium in it but it doesn't include all licenses of
Chromium so it's a violation of software freedom. On 7/30/20 8:34 PM,
Msavoritias wrote:
Dino is not available for Android it seems though. On desktop there
are choices. I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google
play and Fdroid but couldn't find one with acceptable design.
Proprietary or otherwise. I understand that tech people don't care
about UI/UX but we need some nice looking clients. Plus I have seen
that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech people. IRC and
XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been popular by
now. And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to
message my self. Matrix is the only protocol that is actively
developed, is Free Software (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have
a consensus by the wider community. Also the clients seem to
decently designed. I'm saying all this because if we want to attract
more Free Software users, like it or not we need a good presentation
with good interface. otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity. No,
Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
MSavoritias On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 04:37, Denver Gingerich
<[1]denver@ossguy.com> wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:25:36PM
+0200, Msavoritias wrote: On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:47, Adonay
Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
<[1][2]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote: Note: I don't
speak for FSF, nor for GNU. Em 23/07/2020 18:56, Msavoritias
escreveu: I would like to ask is it in the works to have an official
FSF/GNU server in the future? Are there any blockers I can help
with? FSF already has XMPP service for their associate members. I
guess it comes down to personal preference but for me I didn't see
the same features in all the clients I tried and almost all of them
were badly designed. This doesn't help with convincing people to use
XMPP. Where did you go to determine which XMPP clients to try? And
which clients did you try? I believe there should be better
resources to allow people to more easily find the best XMPP clients
- I'm trying to do my part with the recommendations at
[2][3]https://jmp.chat/#clients (for the free software service I
run). In short, use Gajim or Conversations. If you want fancy design
but less features, then Dino. Hopefully we can make these
recommendations more widely-known so that people don't give up on
XMPP. It's an excellent protocol and is very easy to use and
featureful if you have the right client. Denver
[3][4]https://jmp.chat/ References 1.
[5]mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org 2.
[6]https://jmp.chat/#clients 3. [7]https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [8]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[9]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
s
--
Ali Reza Hayati <[10]hayati@riseup.net> [11]www.alirezahayati.com
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [12]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[13]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
2. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
3. https://jmp.chat/#clients
4. https://jmp.chat/
5. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
6. https://jmp.chat/#clients
7. https://jmp.chat/
8. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
9. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
10. mailto:hayati@riseup.net
11. http://www.alirezahayati.com/
12. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
13. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 16:27 ` Denver Gingerich
@ 2020-07-30 19:51 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-31 3:00 ` Denver Gingerich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-30 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denver Gingerich; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3549 bytes --]
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience trying
for people to adopt it.
Every other client listed on this page:
<https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html> for android is basically with
design from twenty years ago.
There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at least.
In contrast Matrix <https://matrix.org/clients/> has a lot of new
clients with active development.
I checked. It does have some development. Which seems interesting
considering the stagnation of clients for mobile.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing. Although it
misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
The thing is that every client I installed had different capabilities
entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
Matrix though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the
fragmentation in the XMPP ecosystem.
That''s true. It is still in heavy development. It does have though at
least 4 server implementations that I know of. Some of them are
lightweight. One of them by matrix.org themselves as a planeed rewrite
for the slow current server.
Also bear in mind that the Goverment of France, and the Goverment of
Germany along with some other providers. Also Kde and Gnome have moved
there. Matrix is here to stay.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 16:27, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>> I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and
>> Fdroid but
>> couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or otherwise.
>
> What is wrong with Conversations?
>
> <https://f-droid.org/app/eu.siacs.conversations>
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.siacs.conversations>
>
>> Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech
>> people.
>> IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have been
>> popular by
>> now.
>> And what good is a system if its not popular? I don't want to
>> message my
>> self.
>> Matrix is the only protocol that is actively developed, is Free
>> Software
>> (although not AGPL-3), and seems to have a consensus by the wider
>> community.
>
> XMPP is also actively developed and has many free software
> implementations (including some that are AGPLv3, like
> <https://jmp.chat/> ).
>
> If you want/need a gratis account that supports all the important
> features, see <https://dismail.de/register.html> .
>
>> Also the clients seem to decently designed.
>
> See above - is there something Conversations is missing versus the
> Matrix client(s) for Android?
>
>> I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free
>> Software users,
>> like it or not we need a good presentation with good interface.
>> otherwise we
>> risk to fall into obscurity.
>> No, Im not saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
>
> I definitely agree. However, I think we need to look at which
> protocols are likely to stand the test of time. Matrix is very new,
> and the server implementation(s?) is extremely resource-heavy. XMPP
> has been around for over 20 years and has multiple lightweight server
> implementations.
>
> Denver
> <https://jmp.chat/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 3957 bytes --]
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience trying
for people to adopt it.
Every other client listed on this
page: [1]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html for android is
basically with design from twenty years ago.
There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at least.
In contrast Matrix [2]https://matrix.org/clients/ has a lot of new
clients with active development.
I checked. It does have some development. Which seems interesting
considering the stagnation of clients for mobile.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing. Although it
misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
The thing is that every client I installed had different capabilities
entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy be hind XMPP and
Matrix though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the
fragmentation in the XMPP ecosystem.
That''s true. It is still in heavy development. It does have though at
least 4 server implementations that I know of. Some of them are
lightweight. One of them by matrix.org themselves as a planeed rewrite
for the slow current server.
Also bear in mind that the Goverment of France, and the Goverment of
Germany along with some other providers. Also Kde and Gnome have moved
there. Matrix is here to stay.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 16:27, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
I wanted a client for Android so i searched on Google play and
Fdroid but couldn't find one with acceptable design. Proprietary or
otherwise.
What is wrong with Conversations?
[3]https://f-droid.org/app/eu.siacs.conversations
[4]https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.siacs.conversations
Plus I have seen that there is a huge shift to Matrix for non-tech
people. IRC and XMPP seem to stay into obscurity. XMPP would have
been popular by now. And what good is a system if its not popular? I
don't want to message my self. Matrix is the only protocol that is
actively developed, is Free Software (although not AGPL-3), and
seems to have a consensus by the wider community.
XMPP is also actively developed and has many free software
implementations (including some that are AGPLv3, like
[5]https://jmp.chat/ ). If you want/need a gratis account that supports
all the important features, see [6]https://dismail.de/register.html .
Also the clients seem to decently designed.
See above - is there something Conversations is missing versus the
Matrix client(s) for Android?
I'm saying all this because if we want to attract more Free Software
users, like it or not we need a good presentation with good
interface. otherwise we risk to fall into obscurity. No, Im not
saying to use proprietary messaging to attract users.
I definitely agree. However, I think we need to look at which protocols
are likely to stand the test of time. Matrix is very new, and the
server implementation(s?) is extremely resource-heavy. XMPP has been
around for over 20 years and has multiple lightweight server
implementations. Denver [7]https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [8]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[9]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
2. https://matrix.org/clients/
3. https://f-droid.org/app/eu.siacs.conversations
4. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.siacs.conversations
5. https://jmp.chat/
6. https://dismail.de/register.html
7. https://jmp.chat/
8. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
9. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 19:51 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-07-31 3:00 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-31 8:58 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Denver Gingerich @ 2020-07-31 3:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Msavoritias; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience trying for
> people to adopt it.
I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
> Every other client listed on this page:
> <https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html> for android is basically with
> design from twenty years ago.
> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at least.
> In contrast Matrix <https://matrix.org/clients/> has a lot of new clients
> with active development.
I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix clients.
> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing. Although it
> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
> The thing is that every client I installed had different capabilities
> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and Matrix
> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent standard. One
> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in the XMPP
> ecosystem.
True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a certain "coherent standard":
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person new to XMPP.
There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
Denver
https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 3:00 ` Denver Gingerich
@ 2020-07-31 8:58 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 13:07 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-07-31 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denver Gingerich; +Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira, libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3707 bytes --]
As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
chance of going mainstream.
Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
see recommending it is for the enccryption.
If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
can get.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though.
So maybe it finds some use there.
I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
to join there.
We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
overcomed.
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
>> trying for
>> people to adopt it.
>
> I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
> Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
> particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
>
>> Every other client listed on this page:
>> <<https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is basically
>> with
>> design from twenty years ago.
>> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
>> least.
>> In contrast Matrix <<https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of new
>> clients
>> with active development.
>
> I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
> with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
> many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
> clients.
>
>> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
>> Although it
>> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
>> The thing is that every client I installed had different
>> capabilities
>> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
>> Matrix
>> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
>> standard. One
>> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
>> the XMPP
>> ecosystem.
>
> True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
> have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
> certain "coherent standard":
>
> <https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
>
> However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
> clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
> new to XMPP.
>
>
> There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
> upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
> other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
> happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
>
> Denver
> <https://jmp.chat/>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 3892 bytes --]
As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
chance of going mainstream.
Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
see recommending it is for the enccryption.
If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
can get.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development o utside
of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks
though.
So maybe it finds some use there.
I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
to join there.
We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
overcomed.
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:4 3PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience trying
for people to adopt it.
I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what particular
aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
Every other client listed on this page:
<[1]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html> for android is basically
with design from twenty years ago. There doesn't seem to be new
clients popping up. for mobile at least. In contrast Matrix
<[2]https://matrix.org/clients/> has a lot of new clients with
active development.
I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page with
screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as many XMPP
clients under active development as there are Matrix clients.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing. Although
it misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets. The thing is
that every client I installed had different capabilities entirely.
It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and Matrix
though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the
fragmentation in the XMPP ecosystem.
True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do have
compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a certain
"coherent standard": [3]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person new
to XMPP. There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue
on an upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols. Denver
[4]https://jmp.chat/
References
1. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
2. https://matrix.org/clients/
3. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
4. https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 8:58 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-07-31 19:20 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode)
2020-08-01 17:25 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-04 13:07 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) @ 2020-07-31 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4630 bytes --]
For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook use it).
Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector is actually violating its own license !
Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for example. This is a huge difference.
Librement,
Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
>As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
>were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
>didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
>
>Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
>on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
>If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
>chance of going mainstream.
>Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
>XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
>using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
>see recommending it is for the enccryption.
>
>If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
>or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
>can get.
>
>In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
>of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though.
>So maybe it finds some use there.
>
>I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
>its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
>
>You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
>It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
>to join there.
>We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
>If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
>capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
>overcomed.
>
>MSavoritias
>
>
>On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
>>> trying for
>>> people to adopt it.
>>
>> I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
>> Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
>> particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
>>
>>> Every other client listed on this page:
>>> <<https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is basically
>>> with
>>> design from twenty years ago.
>>> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
>>> least.
>>> In contrast Matrix <<https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of new
>>> clients
>>> with active development.
>>
>> I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
>> with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
>> many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
>> clients.
>>
>>> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
>>> Although it
>>> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
>>> The thing is that every client I installed had different
>>> capabilities
>>> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
>>> Matrix
>>> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
>>> standard. One
>>> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
>>> the XMPP
>>> ecosystem.
>>
>> True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
>> have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
>> certain "coherent standard":
>>
>> <https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
>>
>> However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
>> clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
>> new to XMPP.
>>
>>
>> There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
>> upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
>> other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
>> happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
>>
>> Denver
>> <https://jmp.chat/>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 4732 bytes --]
For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
[1]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies
like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook
use it).
Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector
is actually violating its own license !
Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for example.
This is a huge difference.
Librement,
Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
<marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
chance of going mainstream.
Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
see recommending it is for the enccryption.
If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
can get.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though.
So maybe it finds some use there.
I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
to join there.
We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
overcomed.
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
trying for
people to adopt it.
I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
Every other client listed on this page:
<<[2]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is
basically
with
design from twenty years ago.
There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
least.
In contrast Matrix <<[3]https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of
new
clients
with active development.
I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
clients.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
Although it
misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
The thing is that every client I installed had different
capabilities
entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
Matrix
though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One
piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
the XMPP
ecosystem.
True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
certain "coherent standard":
<[4]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
new to XMPP.
There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
Denver
<[5]https://jmp.chat/>
References
1. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
2. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
3. https://matrix.org/clients/
4. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
5. https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-07-31 19:20 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode)
2020-08-04 13:43 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-08-01 17:25 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode) @ 2020-07-31 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7942 bytes --]
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is not
more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always a
quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was evolutive
and reliable.
The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF
is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol
in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the same
for Vector.
We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they want
to be popular.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
> overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this app
that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown ?
Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional
as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me an
anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server softwares
like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and powerful than Synapse
(which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are wrong
and subjective.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
> of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
choices for people.
On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it
advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical but
beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
On 31/07/2020 11:12, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) wrote:
> For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
> [1]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
> I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies
> like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook
> use it).
> Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
> protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
> documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector
> is actually violating its own license !
> Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for example.
> This is a huge difference.
> Librement,
>
> Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
> <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
>
> As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
> were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
> didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
> Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
> on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
> If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
> chance of going mainstream.
> Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
> XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
> using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
> see recommending it is for the enccryption.
> If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
> or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
> can get.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
> of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though.
> So maybe it finds some use there.
> I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
> its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
> You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
> It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
> to join there.
> We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
> overcomed.
> MSavoritias
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>
> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
> trying for
> people to adopt it.
>
> I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
> Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
> particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
>
> Every other client listed on this page:
> <<[2]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is
> basically
> with
> design from twenty years ago.
> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
> least.
> In contrast Matrix <<[3]https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of
> new
> clients
> with active development.
>
> I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
> with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
> many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
> clients.
>
> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
> Although it
> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
> The thing is that every client I installed had different
> capabilities
> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
> Matrix
> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
> standard. One
> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
> the XMPP
> ecosystem.
>
> True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
> have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
> certain "coherent standard":
> <[4]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
> However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
> clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
> new to XMPP.
> There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
> upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
> other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
> happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
> Denver
> <[5]https://jmp.chat/>
>
> References
>
> 1. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
> 2. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
> 3. https://matrix.org/clients/
> 4. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
> 5. https://jmp.chat/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 8340 bytes --]
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always
a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
evolutive and reliable.
The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF
is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol
in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
same for Vector.
We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
want to be popular.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
> overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this app
that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown ?
Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional
as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me
an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and powerful
than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
wrong and subjective.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
> of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
choices for people.
On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some
use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical but
beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
On 31/07/2020 11:12, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) wrote:
For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
[1][1]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies
like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook
use it).
Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector
is actually violating its own license !
Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for example.
This is a huge difference.
Librement,
Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
[2]<marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client
on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
chance of going mainstream.
Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
see recommending it is for the enccryption.
If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
can get.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though.
So maybe it finds some use there.
I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I think
its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on.
You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC.
It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users
to join there.
We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
overcomed.
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich [3]<denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
trying for
people to adopt it.
I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
Every other client listed on this page:
<<[2][4]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is
basically
with
design from twenty years ago.
There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
least.
In contrast Matrix <<[3][5]https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of
new
clients
with active development.
I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
clients.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
Although it
misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
The thing is that every client I installed had different
capabilities
entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
Matrix
though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One
piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
the XMPP
ecosystem.
True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
certain "coherent standard":
<[4][6]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
new to XMPP.
There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
Denver
<[5][7]https://jmp.chat/>
References
1. [8]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
2. [9]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
3. [10]https://matrix.org/clients/
4. [11]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
5. [12]https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
[13]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[14]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
2. mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
3. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
4. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
5. https://matrix.org/clients/
6. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
7. https://jmp.chat/
8. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
9. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
10. https://matrix.org/clients/
11. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
12. https://jmp.chat/
13. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
14. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-07-31 19:20 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode)
@ 2020-08-01 17:25 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-01 17:34 ` Denver Gingerich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-01 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode); +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 11678 bytes --]
I know that Whats app at some point used the XMPP protocol. and
Facebook. I don't know if it is used internally still though.
Especially since they are merging all the messaging protocols together
and basically rewriting everything.
Google used to use it but I don't know anymore since they changed three
apps since then.
I was talking about the protocol being Copyleft. Otherwise you risk of
EEE like Whatapp did.
The conversation here is not about Riot or Element. Its about Matrix
the protocol. Which has many clients. Some of them AGPL-3 even.
I fail to understand though what does it matter that XMPP is may or may
not used by Facebook. The point I was trying to make was that Matrix is
used and it has wide deployment. It's not something that's going to go
away.
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good
clients for Mobile, doesn't have modern features or even a coherent
standard.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
PS. How would Vector Violate its own license?
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:12, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
> For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
>
> <https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im>
>
> I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies
> like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook
> use it).
>
> Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
> protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
> documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft,
> Vector is actually violating its own license !
>
> Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for
> example. This is a huge difference.
>
> Librement,
>
> Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
> <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
> <mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org>> a écrit :
>> As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features
>> that
>> were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
>> didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
>>
>> Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last
>> client
>> on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
>> If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
>> chance of going mainstream.
>> Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more
>> than
>> XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
>> using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
>> see recommending it is for the enccryption.
>>
>> If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither
>> XMPP
>> or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
>> can get.
>>
>> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>> outside
>> of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks
>> though.
>> So maybe it finds some use there.
>>
>> I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I
>> think
>> its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving
>> on.
>>
>> You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like
>> IRC.
>> It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new
>> users
>> to join there.
>> We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
>> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
>> overcomed.
>>
>> MSavoritias
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com
>> <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>>> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
>>>> trying for
>>>> people to adopt it.
>>>
>>> I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
>>> Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
>>> particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
>>>
>>>> Every other client listed on this page:
>>>> <<<https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>>> for android is
>>>> basically
>>>> with
>>>> design from twenty years ago.
>>>> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
>>>> least.
>>>> In contrast Matrix <<<https://matrix.org/clients/>>> has a lot
>>>> of new
>>>> clients
>>>> with active development.
>>>
>>> I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
>>> with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
>>> many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
>>> clients.
>>>
>>>> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
>>>> Although it
>>>> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
>>>> The thing is that every client I installed had different
>>>> capabilities
>>>> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP
>>>> and
>>>> Matrix
>>>> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
>>>> standard. One
>>>> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
>>>> the XMPP
>>>> ecosystem.
>>>
>>> True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
>>> have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
>>> certain "coherent standard":
>>>
>>> <<https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>>
>>>
>>> However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
>>> clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person
>>> new to XMPP.
>>>
>>>
>>> There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
>>> upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
>>> other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
>>> happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
>>>
>>> Denver
>>> <<https://jmp.chat/>>
>>
> For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free
> software.
> [1]<https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im>
> I don't understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies
> like Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so
> Facebook
> use it).
> Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
> protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
> documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft,
> Vector
> is actually violating its own license !
> Conversations advocates for free software, unlike Element for
> example.
> This is a huge difference.
> Librement,
>
> Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
> <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
> <mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org>> a écrit :
>
> As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
> were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
> didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers.
> Things don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last
> client
> on that page Zom moved to matrix too.
> If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with no
> chance of going mainstream.
> Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more than
> XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook Stopped
> using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only place I
> see recommending it is for the enccryption.
> If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP
> or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i
> can get.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
> of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks
> though.
> So maybe it finds some use there.
> I like the standarization you said the community is trying. But I
> think
> its too late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving
> on.
> You are right that people still use it but I think it is more like
> IRC.
> It is good for the minority but you are not going to convince new
> users
> to join there.
> We should look how to convince new users to join in modern protocols.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in
> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be
> overcomed.
> MSavoritias
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com
> <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>
> Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience
> trying for
> people to adopt it.
>
> I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
> Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
> particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
>
> Every other client listed on this page:
> <<[2]<https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>>> for android is
> basically
> with
> design from twenty years ago.
> There doesn't seem to be new clients popping up. for mobile at
> least.
> In contrast Matrix <<[3]<https://matrix.org/clients/>>> has a
> lot of
> new
> clients
> with active development.
>
> I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients
> page
> with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
> many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
> clients.
>
> Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing.
> Although it
> misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
> The thing is that every client I installed had different
> capabilities
> entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP
> and
> Matrix
> though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
> standard. One
> piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the fragmentation in
> the XMPP
> ecosystem.
>
> True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We
> do
> have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
> certain "coherent standard":
> <[4]<https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>>
> However, we haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify
> clients, so it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a
> person
> new to XMPP.
> There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on
> an
> upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
> other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear
> may
> happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols.
> Denver
> <[5]<https://jmp.chat/>>
>
> References
>
> 1. <https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im>
> 2. <https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>
> 3. <https://matrix.org/clients/>
> 4. <https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im>
> 5. <https://jmp.chat/>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 11608 bytes --]
I know that Whats app at some point used the XMPP protocol. and
Facebook. I don't know if it is used internally still though.
Especially since they are merging all the messaging protocols together
and basically rewriting everything.
Google used to use it but I don't know anymore since they changed three
apps since then.
I was talking about the protocol being Copyleft. Otherwise you risk of
EEE like Whatapp did.
The conversation here is not about Riot or Element. Its about Matrix
the protocol. Which has many clients. Some of them AGPL-3 even.
I fail to understand though what does it matter that XMPP is may or may
not used by Facebook. The point I was trying to make was that Matrix is
used and it has wide deployment. It's not something that's going to go
away.
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good
clients for Mobile, doesn't have modern features or even a coherent
standard.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
PS. How would Vector Violate its own license?
MSavoritias
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:12, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
[1]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im I don't understand
your statements. XMPP is used by major companies like Whatsapp for
example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook use it).
Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector
is actually violating its own license ! Conversations advocates for
free software, unlike Element for example. This is a huge difference.
Librement, Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
<[2]marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a crit :
As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features
that were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and
there didn't seem to be an intention to implement stickers. Things
don't seems to be changing on that front though. The last client on
that page Zom moved to matrix too. If you ask me they are different
crowds. XMPP is for techies with no chance of going mainstream.
Matrix takes a more radical approach and even now it is used more
than XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since Google and Facebook
Stopped using it. Gone outside of the tech communities that is. Only
place I see recommending it is for the enccryption. If you ask me I
would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because neither XMPP or Matrix can
stop themselves from being EEE. But I will take what i can get. In
mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside
of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks
though. So maybe it finds some use there. I like the standarization
you said the community is trying. But I think its too late for that.
With all the fragmentation and people moving on. You are right that
people still use it but I think it is more like IRC. It is good for
the minority but you are not going to convince new users to join
there. We should look how to convince new users to join in modern
protocols. If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind
XMPP is in capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know
if it can be overcomed. MSavoritias On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00,
Denver Gingerich <[3]denver@ossguy.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
Conversations is badly designed. I am talking from experience trying
for people to adopt it.
I haven't had any bad experiences getting people to adopt
Conversations. Maybe you could be more specific about what
particular aspects of Conversations they have issues with?
Every other client listed on this page:
<<[4]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is
basically with design from twenty years ago. There doesn't seem to
be new clients popping up. for mobile at least. In contrast Matrix
<<[5]https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of new clients with
active development.
I agree that the XMPP community could make a prettier clients page
with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There are at least as
many XMPP clients under active development as there are Matrix
clients.
Its not the problem of something Conversations are missing. Although
it misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets. The thing is
that every client I installed had different capabilities entirely.
It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and Matrix
though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the
fragmentation in the XMPP ecosystem.
True that is another thing the XMPP community could work on. We do
have compliance suites that will tell you if your client meets a
certain "coherent standard":
<[6]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im> However, we
haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify clients, so
it's not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person new to XMPP.
There seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an
upward trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that
other protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may
happen with some of the newer, more hyped protocols. Denver
<[7]https://jmp.chat/>
For instance, Conversations is in the FSD, as confirmed free software.
[1][8]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im I don't
understand your statements. XMPP is used by major companies like
Whatsapp for example, if you need a proprietary one (so Facebook use
it). Conversations is GPL v3, so this is copyleft isn't it ? The Matrix
protocol is not especially copyleft nor XMPP. These are just spec
documents that describes functions. If Matrix is under copyleft, Vector
is actually violating its own license ! Conversations advocates for
free software, unlike Element for example. This is a huge difference.
Librement, Le 31 juillet 2020 10:58:30 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
<[9]marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a crit : As I said they mainly had
issues with the UI/UX and some features that were missing like
stickers. I searched for the second one and there didn't seem to be an
intention to implement stickers. Things don't seems to be changing on
that front though. The last client on that page Zom moved to matrix
too. If you ask me they are different crowds. XMPP is for techies with
no chance of going mainstream. Matrix takes a more radical approach and
even now it is used more than XMPP. With XMPP being mostly gone since
Google and Facebook Stopped using it. Gone outside of the tech
communities that is. Only place I see recommending it is for the
enccryption. If you ask me I would prefer a copyleft protocol. Because
neither XMPP or Matrix can stop themselves from being EEE. But I will
take what i can get. In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough
development outside of Conversations. I know it is pretty popular with
privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some use there. I like the
standarization you said the community is trying. But I think its too
late for that. With all the fragmentation and people moving on. You are
right that people still use it but I think it is more like IRC. It is
good for the minority but you are not going to convince new users to
join there. We should look how to convince new users to join in modern
protocols. If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP
is in capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it
can be overcomed. MSavoritias On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:00, Denver
Gingerich <[10]denver@ossguy.com> wrote: On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at
09:51:43PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: Conversations is badly designed. I
am talking from experience trying for people to adopt it. I haven't had
any bad experiences getting people to adopt Conversations. Maybe you
could be more specific about what particular aspects of Conversations
they have issues with? Every other client listed on this page:
<<[2][11]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html>> for android is
basically with design from twenty years ago. There doesn't seem to be
new clients popping up. for mobile at least. In contrast Matrix
<<[3][12]https://matrix.org/clients/>> has a lot of new clients with
active development. I agree that the XMPP community could make a
prettier clients page with screenshots and such, like Matrix has. There
are at least as many XMPP clients under active development as there are
Matrix clients. Its not the problem of something Conversations are
missing. Although it misses a lot of stuff. Like stickers and widgets.
The thing is that every client I installed had different capabilities
entirely. It made sense when I read the phylosophy behind XMPP and
Matrix though. Matrix wants to be ,from my perspective, a coherent
standard. One piece. XMPP is more modular. Which explains the
fragmentation in the XMPP ecosystem. True that is another thing the
XMPP community could work on. We do have compliance suites that will
tell you if your client meets a certain "coherent standard":
<[4][13]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im> However, we
haven't done enough work to advertise this or certify clients, so it's
not yet easy to benefit from this work as a person new to XMPP. There
seem to be enough people using XMPP for it to continue on an upward
trajectory. It might not see the hockey stick growth that other
protocols do, but it also hasn't flamed out, which I fear may happen
with some of the newer, more hyped protocols. Denver
<[5][14]https://jmp.chat/> References 1.
[15]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im 2.
[16]https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html 3.
[17]https://matrix.org/clients/ 4.
[18]https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im 5.
[19]https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [20]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[21]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
2. mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
3. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
4. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
5. https://matrix.org/clients/
6. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
7. https://jmp.chat/
8. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
9. mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
10. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
11. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
12. https://matrix.org/clients/
13. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
14. https://jmp.chat/
15. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Conversations.im
16. https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html
17. https://matrix.org/clients/
18. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0423.html#im
19. https://jmp.chat/
20. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
21. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-01 17:25 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-08-01 17:34 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-01 23:35 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Denver Gingerich @ 2020-08-01 17:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Msavoritias; +Cc: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode), libreplanet-discuss
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good
> clients for Mobile,
You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations, so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in some way.
> doesn't have modern features
The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features" that XMPP is missing?
> or even a coherent standard.
As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or Conversations.
> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
Denver
https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-01 17:34 ` Denver Gingerich
@ 2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
2020-08-03 21:45 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-01 23:35 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) @ 2020-08-01 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3791 bytes --]
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was evolutive and reliable.
The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the same for Vector.
We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they want to be popular.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in > capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be > overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are wrong and subjective.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development outside > of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal choices for people.
On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
Librement,
Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com> a écrit :
>On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good
>> clients for Mobile,
>
>You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations, so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in some way.
>
>> doesn't have modern features
>
>The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features" that XMPP is missing?
>
>> or even a coherent standard.
>
>As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or Conversations.
>
>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>
>Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
>
>Denver
>https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 3953 bytes --]
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always
a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
evolutive and reliable.
The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF
is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol
in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
same for Vector.
We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
want to be popular.
> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be >
overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this app
that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown ?
Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional
as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me
an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and powerful
than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
wrong and subjective.
> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
outside > of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
choices for people.
On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
finds some use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical but
beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
Librement,
Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
a écrit :
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
good
clients for Mobile,
You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
"bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
some way.
doesn't have modern features
The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
that XMPP is missing?
or even a coherent standard.
As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
Conversations.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
Denver
[1]https://jmp.chat/
References
1. https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 699 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-01 17:34 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-08-01 23:35 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-01 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denver Gingerich; +Cc: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode), libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2806 bytes --]
If I download three clients in Android I will find three different
feature sets. And then I have to pick the right server with the right
extensions. Its all a big puzzle. That is not very coherent.
The modern features I said as above can be stickers, gifs, communities
or Discord servers if you will. There are a lot such features.
Now I understand that XMPP may support these in some extension
somewhere. But the point is that I need to have the right combination
of an app and the server to get this feature.
About the design I guess we have different circles. I like IRC and
terminal too. Doesn't mean that new users will like them and I should
recomend it for them.
Look, the whole point of this anyway was a suggestion for the FSF to
add a Matrix server so new users can patricipate somewhere that fills
modern and they can easily grasp. It's not about XMPP vs Matrix. That
can be an endless debate like IRC vs XMPP. Email vs Gittea or something.
As I have said I downloaded all the XMPP apps that i could find xmpp
site or otherwise. The only one that had the necesserary features was
Conversations. And that one has a bad UI. That doesn't look like a
standard to me, if I have to use Conversations only. On Matrix I can
easily on the top of my head tell you at least 3 that are in active
development. Two of them Copyleft.
As it stands now I will continue to have the Free Software rooms in
Matrix and patricipate there. Any new user that is interested also I
will suggest them to divert there. I don't want to scare them by
showing IRC or some random XMPP server.
MSavoritias
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 17:34, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
>> good
>> clients for Mobile,
>
> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
> some way.
>
>> doesn't have modern features
>
> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
> that XMPP is missing?
>
>> or even a coherent standard.
>
> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
> Conversations.
>
>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we
>> can
>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>
> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
>
> Denver
> <https://jmp.chat/>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 2867 bytes --]
If I download three clients in Android I will find three different
feature sets. And then I have to pick the right server with the right
extensions. Its all a big puzzle. That is not very coherent.
The modern features I said as above can be stickers, gifs, communities
or Discord servers if you will. There are a lot such features.
Now I understand that XMPP may support these in some extension
somewhere. But the point is that I need to have the right combination
of an app and the server to get this feature.
About the design I guess we have different circles. I like IRC and
terminal too. Doesn't mean that new users will like them and I should
recomend it for them.
Look, the whole point of this anyway was a suggestion for the FSF to
add a Matrix server so new users can patricipate somewhere that fills
modern and they can easily grasp. It's not about XMPP vs Matrix. T hat
can be an endless debate like IRC vs XMPP. Email vs Gittea or
something.
As I have said I downloaded all the XMPP apps that i could find xmpp
site or otherwise. The only one that had the necesserary features was
Conversations. And that one has a bad UI. That doesn't look like a
standard to me, if I have to use Conversations only. On Matrix I can
easily on the top of my head tell you at least 3 that are in active
development. Two of them Copyleft.
As it stands now I will continue to have the Free Software rooms in
Matrix and patricipate there. Any new user that is interested also I
will suggest them to divert there. I don't want to scare them by
showing IRC or some random XMPP server.
MSavoritias
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 17:34, Denver Gingerich <denver@ossguy.com>
wrote:
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
good clients for Mobile,
You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
"bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations, so I
have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in some way.
doesn't have modern features
The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm not
sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a protocol
they want to promote. Are there other "modern features" that XMPP is
missing?
or even a coherent standard.
As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you want
a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
Conversations.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
Denver [1]https://jmp.chat/
References
1. https://jmp.chat/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
2020-08-04 7:09 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 20:41 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-03 21:45 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Jean Louis @ 2020-08-03 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode); +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
Mostly I am in agreement with Adrien.
There is this review that I found, that you all may find it
interesting:
https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix
For me XMPP does so many things, we create business with XMPP, we have
all personnel within XMPP coordination, and we use our own servers and
domains, and XMPP work well in worst network conditions as by the
Bwindi Impenetrable Forest in Uganda.
Most important it is free software in terms as in freedom, we are free
to distribute it, and we gain good communication, secure private
network line without spying from third unknown parties.
Jean
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
@ 2020-08-03 21:45 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-04 7:08 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-03 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode); +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10666 bytes --]
Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
protocol.
Please read my messages.
Second I see that you have some personal feelings about Vector. I don't
know why but I respect that. Thus your opinion is subjective too.
That doesnt negate my arguments that Matrix has more features and is a
more coherent whole than XMPP.
Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you are
talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.
I was talking about Android clients specifically not iOS. I have no
desire to be locked in that garden.
Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other clients
like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.
Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to choose
from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features which XMPP
lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.
When you are talking about the Matrix protocol when do they advocate
for Non-Free Software? I know about the widgets on Element. But what
exactly about Matrix is non-free? I thought you could implement how you
want.
What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget? That is
no different than patching Firefox to have Icecat if we go there.
Although I wouldn't choose Element due to the license.
Can you send me a link where the Matrix people said that they don't
want forward secrecy? Because I have read an issue that they want to
upgrade their encryption to something better.
This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
users caring about.
MSavoritias
On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
> always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
> was evolutive and reliable.
>
> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the
> XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
> protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't
> say the same for Vector.
>
> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
> want to be popular.
>
>> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
>> be > overcomed.
>
> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this
> app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
> shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
> functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or
> advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and
> XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable
> and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I
> observed).
>
> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
> wrong and subjective.
>
>> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>> outside > of Conversations.
>
> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
> devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
> are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
> additionnal choices for people.
>
> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>
>> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
>> finds some use there.
>
> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
> about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
> modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
> (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an
> anti-feature lol).
>
> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
>
> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical
> but beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>
> Librement,
>
> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a écrit :
>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't
>>> have good
>>> clients for Mobile,
>>
>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
>> some way.
>>
>>> doesn't have modern features
>>
>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
>> that XMPP is missing?
>>
>>> or even a coherent standard.
>>
>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
>> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
>> Conversations.
>>
>>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we
>>> can
>>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>>
>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
>>
>> Denver
>> <https://jmp.chat/>
> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and
> is
> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
> always
> a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
> evolutive and reliable.
> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one :
> the XSF
> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
> protocol
> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
> same for Vector.
> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the
> Matrix
> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
> want to be popular.
> > If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is
> in >
> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
> be >
> overcomed.
> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by
> a
> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that
> this app
> that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown
> ?
> Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
> functional
> as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for
> me
> an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
> softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and
> powerful
> than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
> wrong and subjective.
> > In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
> outside > of Conversations.
> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
> devs
> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are
> XSF
> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
> choices for people.
> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element.
> And
> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
> > I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe
> it
> finds some use there.
> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
> about
> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
> (because
> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature
> lol).
> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the
> problems
> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the
> FSF.
> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical
> but
> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
> Librement,
>
> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>
> a écrit :
>
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>
> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
> good
> clients for Mobile,
>
> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations
> has
> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of
> Conversations,
> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP
> in
> some way.
>
> doesn't have modern features
>
> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
> that XMPP is missing?
>
> or even a coherent standard.
>
> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
> Conversations.
>
> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we
> can
> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>
> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean.
> Thanks!
> Denver
> [1]<https://jmp.chat/>
>
> References
>
> 1. <https://jmp.chat/>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 10246 bytes --]
Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
protocol.
Please read my messages.
Second I see that you have some personal feelings about Vector. I don't
know why but I respect that. Thus your opinion is subjective too.
That doesnt negate my arguments that Matrix has more features and is a
more coherent whole than XMPP.
Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you are
talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.
I was talking about Android clients specifically not iOS. I have no
desire to be locked in that garden.
Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other clients
like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.
Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to choose
from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features which XMPP
lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.
When you are talking about the Matrix protocol when do they advocate
for Non-Free Software? I know about the widgets on Element. But what
exactly about Matrix is non-free? I thought you could implement how you
want.
What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget? That is
no different than patching Firefox to have Icecat if we go there.
Although I wouldn't choose Element due to the license.
Can you send me a link where the Matrix people said that they don't
want forward secrecy? Because I have read an issue that they want to
upgrade their encryption to something better.
This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
users caring about.
MSavoritias
On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always
a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from the
Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks
of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be useful and
that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We shouldn't have that
discussion since the company behind the Matrix protocol advocates for
non free software, and open source when they want to be popular.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
be > overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this app
that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown ?
Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional
as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me
an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and powerful
than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed). It is
clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are wrong and
subjective.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
outside > of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
choices for people. On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix
client : Element. And it advocates for non free software, especially
Google one.
I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
finds some use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF. I
can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical but
beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity Librement, Le
1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich <[1]denver@ossguy.com>
a crit :
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
good clients for Mobile,
You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
"bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
some way.
doesn't have modern features
The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
that XMPP is missing?
or even a coherent standard.
As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
Conversations.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
Denver [2]https://jmp.chat/
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not always
a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from the
Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks
of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be useful and
that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We shouldn't have that
discussion since the company behind the Matrix protocol advocates for
non free software, and open source when they want to be popular. > If
Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can be >
overcomed. I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is
developed by a very small team, practically one person, and you
conclude that this app that evolves permanently has already shown all
that could be shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client
for Matrix as functional as Conversations (since non free software
usage or advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of
stickers") and XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way
more reliable and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to
overconsumption I observed). It is clear that you like Matrix very
well, but your arguments are wrong and subjective. > In mobile at least
there doesn't seem to be enough development outside > of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and devs
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
choices for people. On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix
client : Element. And it advocates for non free software, especially
Google one. > I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So
maybe it finds some use there. Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to
him ? Everyone should care about privacy, everyone should encrypt his
communications. XMPP's modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more
secure than Olm/Megolm (because it seems Vector thought that forward
secrecy was an anti-feature lol). Do you think the FSF should advocate
for that? With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason
for people who trust the FSF. I can understand you like Element because
it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other
software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about
freedom, not popularity Librement, Le 1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00,
Denver Gingerich <[3]denver@ossguy.com> a crit : On Sat, Aug 01, 2020
at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: The second point I was trying
to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good clients for Mobile, You mention
this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has "bad design".
Most people I know love the design of Conversations, so I have trouble
seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in some way. doesn't have
modern features The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is
"stickers". I'm not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to
have in a protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern
features" that XMPP is missing? or even a coherent standard. As we've
mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you want a client
that supports the important standards, use Gajim or Conversations. So
by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features. Per above,
please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks! Denver
[1][4]https://jmp.chat/ References 1. [5]https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [6]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[7]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
2. https://jmp.chat/
3. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
4. https://jmp.chat/
5. https://jmp.chat/
6. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
7. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-03 21:45 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-08-04 7:08 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 20:52 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) @ 2020-08-04 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10662 bytes --]
Le 3 août 2020 23:45:11 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a écrit :
>Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
>about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
>protocol.
>Please read my messages.
But you're telling us about XMPP on mobile. Have you a functionnal alternative to Conversations on Android that has the same features ?
>Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
>say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
>conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you are
>talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.
OMEMO is based on Signal encryption, known as Axolotl, and is audited by experts (see https://conversations.im/omemo/). Then Olm and Megolm appeared, and Megolm is the most used in order to allow people to retrieve messages when changing their devices (so no forward secrecy).
>
>Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other clients
>like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.
Proprietary software is antifeature.
>Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to choose
>from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features which XMPP
>lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.
But Synapse is the most used.
>
>What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget?
Recatpcha, is a best example.
>This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
>functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
>users caring about.
Which features are you talking about ???
>MSavoritias
>
>On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
><neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
>> always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
>> was evolutive and reliable.
>>
>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the
>> XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
>> protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't
>> say the same for Vector.
>>
>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
>> want to be popular.
>>
>>> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
>>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
>>> be > overcomed.
>>
>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this
>> app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
>> shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
>> functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or
>> advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and
>> XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable
>> and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I
>> observed).
>>
>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
>> wrong and subjective.
>>
>>> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>>> outside > of Conversations.
>>
>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
>> devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
>> are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
>> additionnal choices for people.
>>
>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>>
>>> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
>>> finds some use there.
>>
>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
>> about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
>> modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
>> (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an
>> anti-feature lol).
>>
>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the problems
>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the FSF.
>>
>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical
>> but beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>>
>> Librement,
>>
>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
>> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a écrit :
>>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't
>>>> have good
>>>> clients for Mobile,
>>>
>>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
>>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
>>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
>>> some way.
>>>
>>>> doesn't have modern features
>>>
>>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
>>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
>>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
>>> that XMPP is missing?
>>>
>>>> or even a coherent standard.
>>>
>>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
>>> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
>>> Conversations.
>>>
>>>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we
>>>> can
>>>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>>>
>>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
>>>
>>> Denver
>>> <https://jmp.chat/>
>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and
>> is
>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
>> always
>> a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
>> evolutive and reliable.
>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one :
>> the XSF
>> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
>> protocol
>> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
>> same for Vector.
>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the
>> Matrix
>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
>> want to be popular.
>> > If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is
>> in >
>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
>> be >
>> overcomed.
>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by
>> a
>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that
>> this app
>> that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be shown
>> ?
>> Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
>> functional
>> as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for
>> me
>> an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
>> softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and
>> powerful
>> than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
>> wrong and subjective.
>> > In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>> outside > of Conversations.
>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
>> devs
>> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are
>> XSF
>> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
>> choices for people.
>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element.
>> And
>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>> > I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe
>> it
>> finds some use there.
>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
>> about
>> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
>> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
>> (because
>> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature
>> lol).
>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the
>> problems
>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the
>> FSF.
>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical
>> but
>> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>> Librement,
>>
>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
>> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>
>> a écrit :
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>
>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
>> good
>> clients for Mobile,
>>
>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations
>> has
>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of
>> Conversations,
>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP
>> in
>> some way.
>>
>> doesn't have modern features
>>
>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
>> that XMPP is missing?
>>
>> or even a coherent standard.
>>
>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
>> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
>> Conversations.
>>
>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we
>> can
>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>>
>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean.
>> Thanks!
>> Denver
>> [1]<https://jmp.chat/>
>>
>> References
>>
>> 1. <https://jmp.chat/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
>> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 699 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
@ 2020-08-04 7:09 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 20:41 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) @ 2020-08-04 7:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Louis; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 751 bytes --]
Thanks for this link, this is clear !
Le 3 août 2020 19:07:34 GMT+02:00, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> a écrit :
>Mostly I am in agreement with Adrien.
>
>There is this review that I found, that you all may find it
>interesting:
>https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix
>
>For me XMPP does so many things, we create business with XMPP, we have
>all personnel within XMPP coordination, and we use our own servers and
>domains, and XMPP work well in worst network conditions as by the
>Bwindi Impenetrable Forest in Uganda.
>
>Most important it is free software in terms as in freedom, we are free
>to distribute it, and we gain good communication, secure private
>network line without spying from third unknown parties.
>
>Jean
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 782 bytes --]
Thanks for this link, this is clear !
Le 3 août 2020 19:07:34 GMT+02:00, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> a
écrit :
Mostly I am in agreement with Adrien.
There is this review that I found, that you all may find it
interesting:
[1]https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix
For me XMPP does so many things, we create business with XMPP, we have
all personnel within XMPP coordination, and we use our own servers and
domains, and XMPP work well in worst network conditions as by the
Bwindi Impenetrable Forest in Uganda.
Most important it is free software in terms as in freedom, we are free
to distribute it, and we gain good communication, secure private
network line without spying from third unknown parties.
Jean
References
1. https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 8:58 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-08-04 13:07 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss @ 2020-08-04 13:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss; +Cc: Denver Gingerich, Msavoritias
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2563 bytes --]
Note: forgive me for double-posting, but people involved in this
conversation already did it and I lost track of who and don't know if
you all are subscribed to the list or not.
Em 31/07/2020 05:58, Msavoritias escreveu:
> As I said they mainly had issues with the UI/UX and some features that
> were missing like stickers. I searched for the second one and there
From the messages so far I can see that "missing features" that
Msavoritias mentioned so far are the ones described in the sections to
follow. However, if there is something else missing, please describe it.
# [ ] Sticker XEP/standard
For this I request that all parties interested contribute to [1] so that
it either becomes a XEP or is implemented using existing ones like what
is described in the issue's comments.
# [?] Widget implementations
If what Msavoritias refers to is a persistent notification showing how
many of your accounts are connected then go to Conversations
(eu.siacs.conversations), "Settings", under "Advanced" check
"Active/enable service".
However, if Msavoritias means any widget that stays in the
"desktop"/"start area" of the phone's screen, that depends on what
Msavoritias wants the widget to do, since no mobile operating systems
standardizes what types of widgets must be supported. In this sense,
Conversations (again, eu.siacs.conversations) has a 1 * 1 widget that
you can associate a contact to and it will behave as a shortcut to talk
to that address provided you are connected and have that person in the
contact list inside the XMPP account with which you are connected.
# References
[1] https://github.com/Gargron/xmpp-web/issues/3 .
--
* Ativista do software livre
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
* Software (Free Software Directory)
* Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
* Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
* Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
* Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
* Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
* Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
* Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
* Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
* Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
* XMPP com OMEMO
* E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-30 4:37 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
@ 2020-08-04 13:16 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss @ 2020-08-04 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss; +Cc: Msavoritias, Denver Gingerich
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1523 bytes --]
Note: sorry for double-posting, please tell me if you are subscribed to
the list.
Em 30/07/2020 01:37, Denver Gingerich escreveu:
the best XMPP clients - I'm trying to do my part with the
recommendations at https://jmp.chat/#clients (for the free software
service I run). In short, use Gajim or Conversations. If you want
fancy design but less features, then Dino.
Great work on fostering JMP.chat, I also make a similar recommendation
(also citing JMP.chat) in [1].
# References
[1]: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/XMPP . This is also a community wiki,
so anyone involved in free/libre software activism can contribute.
--
* Ativista do software livre
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
* Software (Free Software Directory)
* Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
* Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
* Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
* Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
* Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
* Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
* Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
* Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
* Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
* XMPP com OMEMO
* E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-07-31 19:20 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode)
@ 2020-08-04 13:43 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-08-04 21:03 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread
From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss @ 2020-08-04 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3071 bytes --]
Em 31/07/2020 16:20, Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode) escreveu:
> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
Interesting, I wonder if there are references to that.
> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF
> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol
> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
> same for Vector.
Good point. On a not so similar subject, this seems to align with the
arguments presented by Software Freedom Conservancy (SFConservancy) in
regards to copyleft enforcement (almost all of their talks, including
the recorded ones, present this "who best enforces copyleft?" paradigm,
and all results in either individual copyright holders or these signing
their contributions to one of FSF-and-sisters, SFConservancy or Software
Freedom Law Center, and avoiding non-disclosure agreements, trade
secrets and contributor license agreements).
> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal
Indeed, in open standards, people and projects being members of the
standards committees/workgroups is a very important thing, specially if
many are in favor of free/libre software or if the group itself has that
commitment or is a non-profit, preferably a charity.
> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
The references in my previous replies to this topic also agree with you. :)
> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).
That is scary indeed.
> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
And with this I contribute referencing to [1].
# References
[1]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html .
--
* Ativista do software livre
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
* Software (Free Software Directory)
* Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
* Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
* Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
* Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
* Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
* Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
* Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
* Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
* Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
* XMPP com OMEMO
* E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
2020-08-04 7:09 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-08-04 20:41 ` Msavoritias
1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-04 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Louis; +Cc: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode), libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2176 bytes --]
How is Matri not Free Software though? Apache-2 is Free Software by the
FSF.
Also this review fails to mention how Matrix has been growing this year
expotentially.
<https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php>
There are already a lot of servers and growing. Gnome and purism and
Kde have their own instances outside of this too.
Also here is the list of at least 5 servers alternative to synapse.
<https://matrix.org/docs/projects/try-matrix-now>
Plus Matrix is working on p2p. So you won't need a server.
<https://matrix.org/blog/posts#dept-of-p2p->
Also the encryption has been through security audits:
<https://matrix.org/blog/2016/11/21/matrixs-olm-end-to-end-encryption-security-assessment-released-and-implemented-cross-platform-on-riot-at-last>
And they want to upgrade it:
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/2458>
I'm not arguing that it is better than Omemo. But it is good encryption
with future upgrades.
I really don't get about Matrix not being Free Software though. Gnu
Specifically says Apache 2 is Free Software.
<https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2>
If you mean the integrations somehow, that are optional then I ahve
some news for you about Firefox.
MSavoritias
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 20:07, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> Mostly I am in agreement with Adrien.
>
> There is this review that I found, that you all may find it
> interesting:
> <https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix>
>
> For me XMPP does so many things, we create business with XMPP, we have
> all personnel within XMPP coordination, and we use our own servers and
> domains, and XMPP work well in worst network conditions as by the
> Bwindi Impenetrable Forest in Uganda.
>
> Most important it is free software in terms as in freedom, we are free
> to distribute it, and we gain good communication, secure private
> network line without spying from third unknown parties.
>
> Jean
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 2814 bytes --]
How is Matri not Free Software though? Apache-2 is Free Software by the
FSF.
Also this review fails to mention how Matrix has been growing this year
expotentially.
[1]https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php
There are already a lot of servers and growing. Gnome and purism and
Kde have their own instances outside of this too.
Also here is the list of at least 5 servers alternative to synapse.
[2]https://matrix.org/docs/projects/try-matrix-now
Plus Matrix is working on p2p. So you won't need a server.
[3]https://matrix.org/blog/posts#dept-of-p2p-
Also the encryption has been through security audits:
[4]https://matrix.org/blog/2016/11/21/matrixs-olm-end-to-end-encryption
-security-assessment-released-and-implemented-cross-platform-on-riot-at
-last
And they want to upgrade it:
[5]https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/2458
I'm not arguing that it is better than Omemo. But it is good encryption
with future upgrades.
I really don't get about Matrix not being Free Software though. Gnu
Specifically says Apache 2 is Free Software.
[6]https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2
If you mean the integrations somehow, that are optional then I ahve
some news for you about Firefox.
MSavoritias
< /div>
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 20:07, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
Mostly I am in agreement with Adrien. There is this review that I
found, that you all may find it interesting:
[7]https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix For me XMPP does so many
things, we create business with XMPP, we have all personnel within XMPP
coordination, and we use our own servers and domains, and XMPP work
well in worst network conditions as by the Bwindi Impenetrable Forest
in Uganda. Most important it is free software in terms as in freedom,
we are free to distribute it, and we gain good communication, secure
private network line without spying from third unknown parties. Jean
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [8]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[9]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php
2. https://matrix.org/docs/projects/try-matrix-now
3. https://matrix.org/blog/posts#dept-of-p2p-
4. https://matrix.org/blog/2016/11/21/matrixs-olm-end-to-end-encryption-security-assessment-released-and-implemented-cross-platform-on-riot-at-last
5. https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues/2458
6. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2
7. https://wiki.404.city/en/XMPP_vs_Matrix
8. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
9. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-04 7:08 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
@ 2020-08-04 20:52 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-04 20:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode); +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 13237 bytes --]
Like what features are you missing in other clients?
What do you mean Proprietary Software? Fluffy Chat is AGPL-3. Did you
even search the clients I mentioned?
Element is Apache-2. This is all Free Software.
The encryption not being as good in Matrix it is known. And they are
looking to upgrade it. See my previous message.
But aside from that I see Matrix more as a IRC and Discord and Slack
alternative. For groups.
And what does it mean that Synapse is the most used now? Coversation is
the most used Android Client.
Does that mean that XMPP is not an open protocol and is only for
Conversations?
If you want to use Element they are open to changing the captca:
<https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/3606>
If you don't want to like me there is fluffy chat which AGPL-3 and not
Catpca.
If you are talking about Desktop there are 6 clients to use one of them
from Gnome.
Plus even three terminal ones and one Emacs client.
I have mentioned before the features:
First a lot of clients which XMPP lacks.
Second ease of use which XMPP lacks.
Third stickers, threads, communities and other modern features that
people expect for groups from Discord and the likes.
Or Voice rooms even.
Keep in mind that all of these and more are planned for Matrix. If you
go through their github issues.
MSavoritias
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 09:08, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
>
>
> Le 3 août 2020 23:45:11 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
> <marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
> <mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org>> a écrit :
>> Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
>> about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
>> protocol.
>> Please read my messages.
>
> But you're telling us about XMPP on mobile. Have you a functionnal
> alternative to Conversations on Android that has the same features ?
>
>
>> Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
>> say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
>> conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you
>> are
>> talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.
> OMEMO is based on Signal encryption, known as Axolotl, and is audited
> by experts (see <https://conversations.im/omemo/>). Then Olm and
> Megolm appeared, and Megolm is the most used in order to allow people
> to retrieve messages when changing their devices (so no forward
> secrecy).
>>
>> Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other
>> clients
>> like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.
> Proprietary software is antifeature.
>
>
>> Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to
>> choose
>> from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features which XMPP
>> lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.
> But Synapse is the most used.
>
>>
>> What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget?
> Recatpcha, is a best example.
>
>> This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
>> functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
>> users caring about.
> Which features are you talking about ???
>
>> MSavoritias
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
>> <neox@os-k.eu <mailto:neox@os-k.eu>> wrote:
>>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and
>>> is
>>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
>>> always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
>>> was evolutive and reliable.
>>>
>>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the
>>> XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
>>> protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You
>>> can't
>>> say the same for Vector.
>>>
>>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the
>>> Matrix
>>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
>>> want to be popular.
>>>
>>>> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is
>>>> in >
>>>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
>>>> be > overcomed.
>>>
>>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by
>>> a
>>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this
>>> app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
>>> shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix
>>> as
>>> functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or
>>> advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers")
>>> and
>>> XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more
>>> reliable
>>> and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I
>>> observed).
>>>
>>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are
>>> wrong and subjective.
>>>
>>>> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>>>> outside > of Conversations.
>>>
>>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
>>> devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
>>> are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
>>> additionnal choices for people.
>>>
>>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element.
>>> And
>>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>>>
>>>> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe
>>>> it
>>>> finds some use there.
>>>
>>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
>>> about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
>>> modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than
>>> Olm/Megolm
>>> (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an
>>> anti-feature lol).
>>>
>>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the
>>> problems
>>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the
>>> FSF.
>>>
>>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is
>>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical
>>> but beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>>>
>>> Librement,
>>>
>>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
>>> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>
>>> <<mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>> a écrit :
>>>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>>>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't
>>>>> have good
>>>>> clients for Mobile,
>>>>
>>>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations
>>>> has
>>>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of
>>>> Conversations,
>>>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
>>>> some way.
>>>>
>>>>> doesn't have modern features
>>>>
>>>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
>>>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
>>>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
>>>> that XMPP is missing?
>>>>
>>>>> or even a coherent standard.
>>>>
>>>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
>>>> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
>>>> Conversations.
>>>>
>>>>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so
>>>>> we
>>>>> can
>>>>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>>>>
>>>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean.
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Denver
>>>> <<https://jmp.chat/>>
>>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part)
>>> and
>>> is
>>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
>>> always
>>> a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was
>>> evolutive and reliable.
>>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one :
>>> the XSF
>>> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
>>> protocol
>>> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say
>>> the
>>> same for Vector.
>>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the
>>> Matrix
>>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when
>>> they
>>> want to be popular.
>>> > If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is
>>> in >
>>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it
>>> can
>>> be >
>>> overcomed.
>>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed
>>> by
>>> a
>>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that
>>> this app
>>> that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
>>> shown
>>> ?
>>> Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
>>> functional
>>> as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is
>>> for
>>> me
>>> an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
>>> softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and
>>> powerful
>>> than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed).
>>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments
>>> are
>>> wrong and subjective.
>>> > In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
>>> outside > of Conversations.
>>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project
>>> and
>>> devs
>>> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
>>> are
>>> XSF
>>> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
>>> additionnal
>>> choices for people.
>>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client :
>>> Element.
>>> And
>>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>>> > I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So
>>> maybe
>>> it
>>> finds some use there.
>>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
>>> about
>>> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
>>> modern
>>> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
>>> (because
>>> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature
>>> lol).
>>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the
>>> problems
>>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the
>>> FSF.
>>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and
>>> it is
>>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are
>>> unethical
>>> but
>>> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>>> Librement,
>>>
>>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich
>>> <denver@ossguy.com <mailto:denver@ossguy.com>
>>> <<mailto:denver@ossguy.com>>>
>>> a écrit :
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
>>>
>>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't
>>> have
>>> good
>>> clients for Mobile,
>>>
>>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why
>>> Conversations
>>> has
>>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of
>>> Conversations,
>>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back
>>> XMPP
>>> in
>>> some way.
>>>
>>> doesn't have modern features
>>>
>>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers".
>>> I'm
>>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
>>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern
>>> features"
>>> that XMPP is missing?
>>>
>>> or even a coherent standard.
>>>
>>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If
>>> you
>>> want a client that supports the important standards, use
>>> Gajim or
>>> Conversations.
>>>
>>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so
>>> we
>>> can
>>> attract new contributors that may want modern features.
>>>
>>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean.
>>> Thanks!
>>> Denver
>>> [1]<<https://jmp.chat/>>
>>>
>>> References
>>>
>>> 1. <<https://jmp.chat/>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>>> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
>>> <<mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>>
>>>
>>> <<https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 12495 bytes --]
Like what features are you missing in other clients?
What do you mean Proprietary Software? Fluffy Chat is AGPL-3. Did you
even search the clients I mentioned?
Element is Apache-2. This is all Free Software.
The encryption not being as good in Matrix it is known. And they are
looking to upgrade it. See my previous message.
But aside from that I see Matrix more as a IRC and Discord and Slack
alternative. For groups.
And what does it mean that Synapse is the most used now? Coversation is
the most used Android Client.
Does that mean that XMPP is not an open protocol and is only for
Conversations?
If you want to use Element they are open to changing the captca:
[1]https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/3606
If you don't want to like me there is fluffy chat which AGPL-3 and not
Catpca.
If you are talking about Desktop there are 6 clients to use one of them
from Gnome.
Plus even three terminal ones and one Emacs client.
I have mentioned before the features:
First a lot of clients which XMPP lacks.
Second ease of use which XMPP lacks.
Third stickers, threads, communities and other modern features that
people expect for groups from Discord and the likes.
Or Voice rooms even.
Keep in mind that all of these and more are planned for Matrix. If you
go through their github issues.
MSavoritias
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 09:08, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
<neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
Le 3 aot 2020 23:45:11 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
<[2]marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a crit :
Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
protocol. Please read my messages.
But you're telling us about XMPP on mobile. Have you a functionnal
alternative to Conversations on Android that has the same features ?
Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you
are talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.
OMEMO is based on Signal encryption, known as Axolotl, and is audited
by experts (see [3]https://conversations.im/omemo/). Then Olm and
Megolm appeared, and Megolm is the most used in order to allow people
to retrieve messages when changing their devices (so no forward
secrecy).
Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other
clients like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.
Proprietary software is antifeature.
Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to
choose from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features
which XMPP lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.
But Synapse is the most used.
What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget?
Recatpcha, is a best example.
This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
users caring about.
Which features are you talking about ???
MSavoritias On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on
Freenode) <[4]neox@os-k.eu> wrote:
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
was evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from
the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the
tracks of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be
useful and that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We
shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
want to be popular.
If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
be > overcomed.
I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this
app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or
advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers")
and XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more
reliable and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to
overconsumption I observed). It is clear that you like Matrix very
well, but your arguments are wrong and subjective.
In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
outside > of Conversations.
I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
additionnal choices for people. On mobile, there is only one
functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it advocates for non free
software, especially Google one.
I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
finds some use there.
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than
Olm/Megolm (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was
an anti-feature lol). Do you think the FSF should advocate for that?
With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason for
people who trust the FSF. I can understand you like Element because
it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other
software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about
freedom, not popularity Librement, Le 1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00,
Denver Gingerich <[5]denver@ossguy.com
<[6]mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a crit :
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:
The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
good clients for Mobile,
You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
"bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
some way.
doesn't have modern features
The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
that XMPP is missing?
or even a coherent standard.
As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
Conversations.
So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
attract new contributors that may want modern features.
Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
Denver <[7]https://jmp.chat/>
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
was evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from
the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the
tracks of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be
useful and that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We
shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
want to be popular. > If Conversations are the benchmark for how
much behind XMPP is in > capabilities that a modern user wants, then
I don't know if it can be > overcomed. I can't understand what do
you mean. Conversations is developed by a very small team,
practically one person, and you conclude that this app that evolves
permanently has already shown all that could be shown ? Excuse me,
but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional as
Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me
an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and
powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I
observed). It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your
arguments are wrong and subjective. > In mobile at least there
doesn't seem to be enough development outside > of Conversations. I
can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
additionnal choices for people. On mobile, there is only one
functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it advocates for non free
software, especially Google one. > I know it is pretty popular with
privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some use there. Have you
ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
(because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an
anti-feature lol). Do you think the FSF should advocate for that?
With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason for
people who trust the FSF. I can understand you like Element because
it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other
software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about
freedom, not popularity Librement, Le 1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00,
Denver Gingerich <[8]denver@ossguy.com
<[9]mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a crit : On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at
07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: The second point I was trying
to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good clients for Mobile, You
mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
"bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
some way. doesn't have modern features The only feature you have
explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm not sure why this is an
important feature for FSF to have in a protocol they want to
promote. Are there other "modern features" that XMPP is missing? or
even a coherent standard. As we've mentioned, there are coherent
standards for XMPP. If you want a client that supports the important
standards, use Gajim or Conversations. So by that point I was
advocating to have a Matrix server so we can attract new
contributors that may want modern features. Per above, please tell
us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks! Denver
[1]<[10]https://jmp.chat/> References 1. <[11]https://jmp.chat/>
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [12]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
<[13]mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
<[14]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-disc
uss>
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [15]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[16]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/3606
2. mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
3. https://conversations.im/omemo/
4. mailto:neox@os-k.eu
5. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
6. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
7. https://jmp.chat/
8. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
9. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
10. https://jmp.chat/
11. https://jmp.chat/
12. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
13. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
14. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
15. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
16. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* Re: Matrix communication protocol.
2020-08-04 13:43 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
@ 2020-08-04 21:03 ` Msavoritias
0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread
From: Msavoritias @ 2020-08-04 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adonay Felipe Nogueira; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4645 bytes --]
My only issues is not the two that you mention. We have also:
1. No coherent Standard so everybody can have the same features.
2. Not a lot of Clients.
3. Not a lot of Clients that look decent.
4. No communities.
5. No threading.
6. No Voice rooms like Discord.
These are just some of the problems that I have. As I explained above
Matrix is for groups mostly. And it is much more welcoming to newcomers
than IRC or XMPP. or even Mailing lists for that matter.
Well FSF has Wire as a high priority project. WHich is a straight for
Profit Company unlike Matrix.
Also I didn't know FSF was against companies. Their latest article is
that being FLOSS doesn't mean no Companies.
<https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:High_Priority_Projects>
But you can already get involved in Matrix and developing the Spec.
Isn't that what you mean?
Well the IRC that we currently using has not encryption. So what
exactly are comparing here?
MSavoritias
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:43, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
> Em 31/07/2020 16:20, Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode) escreveu:
>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part)
>> and is
>
> Interesting, I wonder if there are references to that.
>
>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one :
>> the XSF
>> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
>> protocol
>> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say
>> the
>> same for Vector.
>
> Good point. On a not so similar subject, this seems to align with the
> arguments presented by Software Freedom Conservancy (SFConservancy) in
> regards to copyleft enforcement (almost all of their talks, including
> the recorded ones, present this "who best enforces copyleft?"
> paradigm,
> and all results in either individual copyright holders or these
> signing
> their contributions to one of FSF-and-sisters, SFConservancy or
> Software
> Freedom Law Center, and avoiding non-disclosure agreements, trade
> secrets and contributor license agreements).
>
>> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
>> are XSF
>> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
>> additionnal
>
> Indeed, in open standards, people and projects being members of the
> standards committees/workgroups is a very important thing, specially
> if
> many are in favor of free/libre software or if the group itself has
> that
> commitment or is a non-profit, preferably a charity.
>
>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client :
>> Element. And
>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
>
> The references in my previous replies to this topic also agree with
> you. :)
>
>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
>> about
>> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
>> modern
>> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
>> (because
>> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature
>> lol).
>
> That is scary indeed.
>
>> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
>
> And with this I contribute referencing to [1].
>
>
> # References
>
>
> [1]:
> <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html> .
>
>
> --
> * Ativista do software livre
> * <https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno>
> * Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
> * Software (Free Software Directory)
> * Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
> * Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
> * Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
> * Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
> * Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
> * Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
> * Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
> * Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
> * Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
> * Ao enviar anexos
> * Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
> * Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
> * Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
> * Vide endereço anterior
> * Mensagens secretas somente via
> * XMPP com OMEMO
> * E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> <mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 4714 bytes --]
My only issues is not the two that you mention. We have also:
1. No coherent Standard so everybody can have the same features.
2. Not a lot of Clients.
3. Not a lot of Clients that look decent.
4. No communities.
5. No threading.
6. No Voice rooms like Discord.
These are just some of the problems that I have. As I explained above
Matrix is for groups mostly. And it is much more welcoming to newcomers
than IRC or XMPP. or even Mailing lists for that matter.
Well FSF has Wire as a high priority project. WHich is a straight for
Profit Company unlike Matrix.
Also I didn't know FSF was against companies. Their latest article is
that being FLOSS doesn't mean no Companies.
[1]https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:High_Priority_Projects
But you can already get involved in Matrix and developing the Spec.
Isn't that what you mean?
Well the IRC that we currently using has not encryption. So what
exactly are comparing here?
MSavoritias
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:43, Adonay Felipe Nogueira via
libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
Em 31/07/2020 16:20, Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode) escreveu:
Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
Interesting, I wonder if there are references to that.
The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the
XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a
protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't
say the same for Vector.
Good point. On a not so similar subject, this seems to align with the
arguments presented by Software Freedom Conservancy (SFConservancy) in
regards to copyleft enforcement (almost all of their talks, including
the recorded ones, present this "who best enforces copyleft?" paradigm,
and all results in either individual copyright holders or these signing
their contributions to one of FSF-and-sisters, SFConservancy or
Software Freedom Law Center, and avoiding non-disclosure agreements,
trade secrets and contributor license agreements).
of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are
XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
additionnal
Indeed, in open standards, people and projects being members of the
standards committees/workgroups is a very important thing, specially if
many are in favor of free/libre software or if the group itself has
that commitment or is a non-profit, preferably a charity.
On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element.
And it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.
The references in my previous replies to this topic also agree with
you. :)
Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than
Olm/Megolm (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was
an anti-feature lol).
That is scary indeed.
beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity
And with this I contribute referencing to [1]. # References [1]:
[2]https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html .
--
* Ativista do software livre *
[3]https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno * Membro dos grupos
avaliadores de * Software (Free Software Directory) * Distribuies de
sistemas (FreedSoftware) * Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team) * No sou
advogado e no fomento os no livres * Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrnico
do teu e-mail * Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada *
Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP * Chave pblica: vide endereo anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude * Se no tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo
"signature.asc" * Ao enviar anexos * Docs., planilhas e apresentaes:
use OpenDocument * Outros tipos: vide endereo anterior * Use protocolos
de comunicao federadas * Vide endereo anterior * Mensagens secretas
somente via * XMPP com OMEMO * E-mail criptografado e assinado com
OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
mailing list [4]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[5]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
References
1. https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:High_Priority_Projects
2. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
3. https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
4. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
5. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-08-04 21:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-07-23 21:56 Matrix communication protocol Msavoritias
[not found] ` <87eep1bw5k.fsf@gmail.com>
2020-07-24 8:37 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-25 7:07 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-07-24 14:47 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-07-29 16:25 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 4:37 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-30 16:04 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 16:21 ` Ali Reza Hayati
2020-07-30 19:30 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-30 16:27 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-30 19:51 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-31 3:00 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-07-31 8:58 ` Msavoritias
2020-07-31 9:12 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-07-31 19:20 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode)
2020-08-04 13:43 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-08-04 21:03 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-01 17:25 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-01 17:34 ` Denver Gingerich
2020-08-01 23:01 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-03 17:07 ` Jean Louis
2020-08-04 7:09 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 20:41 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-03 21:45 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-04 7:08 ` Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
2020-08-04 20:52 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-01 23:35 ` Msavoritias
2020-08-04 13:07 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
2020-08-04 13:16 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).