From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 502AF1F5AE for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:58:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52832 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k1QsP-0006WI-2L for e@80x24.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 04:58:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36666) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k1QsB-0006Vx-0V for libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 04:58:39 -0400 Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:60350) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k1Qs8-0008VN-8x for libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 04:58:38 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4FE528D2; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:58:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at disroot.org Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jnyuLyEb0k2I; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:58:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:58:30 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail; t=1596185911; bh=mSkyasOI7xNy0/pPcUs900f5KxTlFoM7QoGFU32zD/g=; h=Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=cv9Oh4hM4YOcTSKVv+EDUTXuOBsmWf3r7cAX6mQ/EBAgZigWZfD0Q9yJJQJtE6fGC mVPcA9AMGzxGqFy1Pww1iw6EBzIyHCHZmzjxL1ElwD2VWOX8H/PCHfcz0+LgnVIrhO C2LVCQx9nxGWXiN0CFHyXRsCIrEmf62mKBrsthwb7EK0IZ1418TBed8ok7sEEONuin p0BcZ/gAx8VsGBnUDY2y+sgtmoRB1FVjb96EylEaUJ6Gd+laAlDf7u6zDwPrAMYUFz gJmLVJ32MJiQnWffJW5U+qsXSrl9ImUUs/fKMTuplM0cYwRwX7HDyrpNW+13bLRC3A YPqZY1DB0ZzPQ== From: Msavoritias Subject: Re: Matrix communication protocol. To: Denver Gingerich Cc: Adonay Felipe Nogueira , libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org Message-Id: <1596185910.1161.0@disroot.org> In-Reply-To: <20200731030048.GI25289@ossguy.com> References: <1595541394.1159.3@disroot.org> <1596039936.1150.2@disroot.org> <20200730043725.GC25289@ossguy.com> <1596125074.1189.0@disroot.org> <20200730162745.GE25289@ossguy.com> <1596138703.28021.1@disroot.org> <20200731030048.GI25289@ossguy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.21.23.139; envelope-from=marinus.savoritias@disroot.org; helo=knopi.disroot.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/31 04:58:33 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3801802093243595824==" Errors-To: libreplanet-discuss-bounces+e=80x24.org@libreplanet.org Sender: "libreplanet-discuss" --===============3801802093243595824== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-MNqu0S6K45QKwnfP1pVA" --=-MNqu0S6K45QKwnfP1pVA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed 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 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: >> <> 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 <> 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": > > > > 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 > --=-MNqu0S6K45QKwnfP1pVA MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 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/ --=-MNqu0S6K45QKwnfP1pVA-- --===============3801802093243595824== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KbGlicmVwbGFu ZXQtZGlzY3VzcyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbGlicmVwbGFuZXQtZGlzY3Vzc0BsaWJyZXBsYW5ldC5v cmcKaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5saWJyZXBsYW5ldC5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9saWJyZXBs YW5ldC1kaXNjdXNz --===============3801802093243595824==--