Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Martin Roth]

Additionally, the meeting software needs to work well for everyone,
pretty much anywhere in the world.  The coreboot community is an
amazingly diverse group.  So the meeting method needs to have a way to
work well in pretty much any OS you can think of, or there needs to be
an alternate method of connection - like a telephone bridge.

However, as I said in my last email, I'm not interested in changing
again right now.  We just went through an extensive evaluation process
roughly 5 months ago, and we picked bluejeans.  If someone wants to
help us evaluate tools again in November, that would be the time.
Until then, let's stick with bluejeans for the community meeting.
Let's stop second guessing our decisions every few months.

Since it seems like people missed my last post about this, here's the link:
https://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2017-March/083582.html

Martin

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 2:02 PM, ron minnich  wrote:
> Nobody is stopping anyone from implementing and letting us try something
> open. I think it's great. I would love to be able to use it.
>
> But some rules apply:
>
> o a lot of us have full time jobs and (in my case at least) a skill set that
> does not include competence/interest in hacking on meeting software. It has
> to work for me as EASILY as what we are using today.
>
> o it has to work at least as WELL as what we're using today. So far, every
> single open source alternative has not come close to meeting that standard.
>
> o And, to reiterate, no single points of failure. It seems to me that
> anything that  depends on one person providing 24x7 availability has a
> single point of failure by definition. And, in at least one case, we went to
> have a meeting and the (non-redundant) person running the (non-redundant)
> server connected to the (non-redundant) network was not around. No meeting
> occurred. That's a failure.
>
>
>
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[ron minnich]

Nobody is stopping anyone from implementing and letting us try something
open. I think it's great. I would love to be able to use it.

But some rules apply:

o a lot of us have full time jobs and (in my case at least) a skill set
that does not include competence/interest in hacking on meeting software.
It has to work for me as EASILY as what we are using today.

o it has to work at least as WELL as what we're using today. So far, every
single open source alternative has not come close to meeting that standard.

o And, to reiterate, no single points of failure. It seems to me that
anything that  depends on one person providing 24x7 availability has a
single point of failure by definition. And, in at least one case, we went
to have a meeting and the (non-redundant) person running the
(non-redundant) server connected to the (non-redundant) network was not
around. No meeting occurred. That's a failure.
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Peter Stuge]

Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> > > > I never tried the web interface.
> > > 
> > > We did, it failed us.
> > 
> > What problems did people have with mumble-web, and where was the
> > websockets server running, relative to the mumble server?
> 
> It was actually your mumble server.

I didn't have mumble-web. I asked about the web interface, which has
failed us at some point, as Patrick wrote.


> We used it for one or two meetings, and the sound was choppy and it
> was basically impossible to have a conversation.

I knew that my mumble server was used, but this feedback only reaches
me now. Thanks for letting me know!

Ron once said something completely different; that he couldn't run
the (native) client software on his ChromeOS system. That made me
interested in getting feedback from mumble-web.


Since I use the server for various meetings with great success I'm
interested in investigating what caused the issues for us in coreboot.
If anyone can remember having problems and would like to do some
testing with me at some point then please get in touch off-list. Thanks!


ttu...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> Just because I work with OSS doesn't automatically make me a zealot
> for OSS as the only way to go.

Of course not; it's just the best way to go.


> think of the contribution to Coreboot source code this energy could
> generate instead of spending it on fixing a problem that doesn't
> need fixing?

I think it's an important problem.

I agree with Stefan that it's not a problem for the coreboot community,
but I want to not lose our user experience.


ron minnich wrote:
> Unfortunately, the free software meeting systems have not worked out.

Suboptimal solutions need to be re-evaluated, once every few years
seems easy.


> It can't depend on one person managing the server, or the connection,
> or the setup.

I think a one person argument is silly, but I agree with the general
argument about avoiding single points of failure.


> portability in the Linux world seems to mean "works on Ubuntu AND Arch".

Daring extrapolation. Sorry that you've had such bad experience.


> We have to see it work everywhere.

A big part of which is to be active.

It makes no sense to push a burden of demonstration for "every
possible client" to a single point; that's setting up for failure
and sending the message that nothing should improve.


> There's also an issue with the premise:
..
> What does it really mean

To keep trying.


//Peter

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[mdn]

Le 18/03/2017 00:47, Stefan Reinauer a écrit :
> * taii...@gmx.com  [170317 23:35]:
>> I believe it needs fixing - It is a philosophical issue, I mean you have to
>> draw the line or you get the slippery slope for "just a little non-free here
>> for convenience just this once" has lead to most of the community thinking
>> that a system with 100% blobbed hw init is "free firmware" (coreboot just
>> being a wrapper shim loader for FSP in that case) or that linux drivers with
>> a binary blob are "open source drivers".
>> It is a matter of pride.
>>
>> The linux communities quiet acceptance of things like ME/PSP (ex: why don't
>> sysadmins say no and buy POWER?) - is because of philosophy-slacking.
>  
> Nothing about this is quiet. We have been actively working with hardware
> vendors to open up as much stuff as possible, for a good two decades
> now. 
> 
> The reason is not philosophy-slacking. Because philosophy makes you feel
> righteous, but it does not get any work done. Instead of having this
> discussion (and making hundreds of people read it) this community could
> spend the same time making coreboot better and mentoring the corporate
> community members.
> 
> The sooner we get away from an "us vs them" mentality, the faster we can
> be actually changing things.
Sorry to interrupt.
I wanted to pass a word.
I agree that the us vs them mentality has to end.
Just a thing about philosophy.
I believe that it makes you think.
If you build a road without a plan, where are you going ?
This is just a balance that everyone has to make.
Rushing leads nowhere either.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> 

I wish you all good continuation.
Freely
BERNARD



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Stefan Reinauer]

* Peter Stuge  [170317 14:27]:
> Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:
> > 2017-03-17 13:17 GMT+01:00 Dumitru Ursu :
> > > I never tried the web interface.
> > 
> > We did, it failed us.
> 
> I wish someone would have mentioned that sooner.
> 
> What problems did people have with mumble-web, and where was the
> websockets server running, relative to the mumble server?

It was actually your mumble server. We used it for one or two meetings, and the
sound was choppy and it was basically impossible to have a conversation.

Stefan

> 
> //Peter
> 
> -- 
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
> 

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Stefan Reinauer]

* taii...@gmx.com  [170317 23:35]:
> I believe it needs fixing - It is a philosophical issue, I mean you have to
> draw the line or you get the slippery slope for "just a little non-free here
> for convenience just this once" has lead to most of the community thinking
> that a system with 100% blobbed hw init is "free firmware" (coreboot just
> being a wrapper shim loader for FSP in that case) or that linux drivers with
> a binary blob are "open source drivers".
> It is a matter of pride.
> 
> The linux communities quiet acceptance of things like ME/PSP (ex: why don't
> sysadmins say no and buy POWER?) - is because of philosophy-slacking.
 
Nothing about this is quiet. We have been actively working with hardware
vendors to open up as much stuff as possible, for a good two decades
now. 

The reason is not philosophy-slacking. Because philosophy makes you feel
righteous, but it does not get any work done. Instead of having this
discussion (and making hundreds of people read it) this community could
spend the same time making coreboot better and mentoring the corporate
community members.

The sooner we get away from an "us vs them" mentality, the faster we can
be actually changing things.

Stefan


-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[taii...@gmx.com]

On 03/17/2017 10:25 AM, ttu...@codeaurora.org wrote:


I'm sorry, I have to contribute at this point.

I got started with OSS in 2000 when Monta Vista Software (anybody 
remember HardHat Linux?) hired me as a FAE.
I was teamed with a salesperson and we were trying to close business 
selling an embedded Linux distribution.
Every 6 months or so we would have a sales meeting somewhere and 
engineering would share with us the latest product development news, etc.


Ahead of one of these meetings I happened to be in headquarters (Santa 
Clara, CA) and remember very clearly the happy face of this 
engineering manager who had just "wasted" (my opinion) 3-5 days 
generating a presentation slide-deck with OSS (I don't even know if 
Open Office was available at that time) for the meeting, instead of 
spending two hours doing same presentation with Powerpoint.


Just because I work with OSS doesn't automatically make me a zealot 
for OSS as the only way to go.  I choose the correct tool to get the 
job done.  I always hope for an OSS option, but to this day, Outlook 
is the only product Micro$oft got right and I will choose it over any 
of the OSS options I have tried as an email client.


I will leave with, think of the contribution to Coreboot source code 
this energy could generate instead of spending it on fixing a problem 
that doesn't need fixing?

Cheers,
T.mike


I am a sysadmin not a programmer, so this is my department.

I believe it needs fixing - It is a philosophical issue, I mean you have 
to draw the line or you get the slippery slope for "just a little 
non-free here for convenience just this once" has lead to most of the 
community thinking that a system with 100% blobbed hw init is "free 
firmware" (coreboot just being a wrapper shim loader for FSP in that 
case) or that linux drivers with a binary blob are "open source drivers".

It is a matter of pride.

The linux communities quiet acceptance of things like ME/PSP (ex: why 
don't sysadmins say no and buy POWER?) - is because of philosophy-slacking.


--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[ron minnich]

This discussion comes up every few years, and it quickly diverges into
discussion of a long list of candidate systems. This current thread is no
exception.

FWIW, we've tried many of them.
Unfortunately, the free software meeting systems have not worked out.

For any system to work, there are a few properties it must have:
1. It can't depend on one person managing the server, or the connection, or
the setup. I.e., it can't have a single point of failure. People have
kindly offered to set up SIP servers, many times, and we even used them a
few times, but the problem is that the people who set up the server must be
available for each and every meeting, from t = 0 to infinity, or it doesn't
work. We've been here before, and it's really frustrating to get to the
meeting time and find out the one person who is needed to make it work is
not reachable. It is really, really easy to be there once or twice to make
the meeting. Being there, without fail, once a week is a lot harder than it
seems at first.

2. The software has to work for every possible client, and I do mean all.
People tend to fall into the "well it works on *my* laptop" trap very
easily. This is particularly problematical with systems that start on
Linux, since portability in the Linux world seems to mean "works on Ubuntu
AND Arch". There are a lot of us who use non-free software all the time
(this is being typed on a mac pro) because the free software doesn't work
as well. So we need systems that work for ios, android, osx, linux laptops
in all their many variations, ... and the common experience with all these
alternative meeting systems is that they are just not good enough to span
that space. Yes, they should work. And if they did, we would have been
using them since 2006, when this issue first came up. Now you can argue
with me that the system you are advocating works on all those platforms,
but I won't believe it until I see it. We've had people advocate some
platforms over the years, with the claim that they worked everywhere, only
to find out the claim had not been tested -- it's very common to hear:
"well they SAID it worked everywhere ... wow ... we didn't know it wouldn't
work on your x". It's not enough to say "works everywhere." We have to
see it work everywhere.

3. Related to (1), it goes without saying, but any meeting system has to be
structured and implemented as a scalable, reliable system. It has to not
fail easily. This means redundancy in networks, servers, everything. So
setting up one SIP server on one network connection is not a viable idea.
That's why people run many of these services in clouds: the providers of
clouds are pretty good (not perfect!) at providing very reliable services.

There's also an issue with the premise: that because coreboot is striving
to create free and open software for a single field of use, every single
coreboot community activity must use only free and open software. How far
does that go? Do we reject people who use iphones to join a meeting? Do we
not allow packets to flow via cisco routers? Do we not run meetings on
systems with microcode blobs? Are you not allowed to run on a laptop which
has binary blobs in the disk controller? What about the OS in Atheros or
other WIFI part? What about laptop modems -- do we not allow you to join a
meeting if you are on the laptop modem? Or are you just requiring that some
very narrow slice of software at the the endpoints be free and open source,
while everything between can be proprietary?

What does it really mean to say "why don't we use something free and
open source?" when we talk about meeting software? You need to define the
terms, and specify where it's ok for software to be non-free and
non-open-source. Because, inevitably, some of it will be in ways you can't
control.

thanks

ron

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:49 AM Iru Cai  wrote:

Have you tried the Matrix protocol (https://matrix.org) that I mentioned?
It supports WebRTC as well as talk with text and files.

If you are not satisfied with the existing public servers (
https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php), you can even host one.

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Patrick Georgi via coreboot <
coreboot@coreboot.org> wrote:

2017-03-17 15:50 GMT+01:00 Juliana Rodrigues :
> that I know uses jitsi: https://meet.jit.si
> It's MIT, but works very well.
Thanks for the pointer.

We already tried jitsi, but I think without the bridge service (which
only seems to exist for about a year).
So, something to re-evaluate, but the last time we tried "works very
well" was the opposite of our experience due to bandwidth
requirements.


Patrick
(note to all so I don't have to sound like a grumpy, broken record: Is
it FOSS and reasonably popular? Then it's rather likely that we
already tried it)

--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot




-- 
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork 

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Iru Cai]

Have you tried the Matrix protocol (https://matrix.org) that I mentioned?
It supports WebRTC as well as talk with text and files.

If you are not satisfied with the existing public servers (
https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php), you can even host one.

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Patrick Georgi via coreboot <
coreboot@coreboot.org> wrote:

> 2017-03-17 15:50 GMT+01:00 Juliana Rodrigues :
> > that I know uses jitsi: https://meet.jit.si
> > It's MIT, but works very well.
> Thanks for the pointer.
>
> We already tried jitsi, but I think without the bridge service (which
> only seems to exist for about a year).
> So, something to re-evaluate, but the last time we tried "works very
> well" was the opposite of our experience due to bandwidth
> requirements.
>
>
> Patrick
> (note to all so I don't have to sound like a grumpy, broken record: Is
> it FOSS and reasonably popular? Then it's rather likely that we
> already tried it)
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>



-- 
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents. Send
OpenDocument instead! http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Patrick Georgi via coreboot]

2017-03-17 15:50 GMT+01:00 Juliana Rodrigues :
> that I know uses jitsi: https://meet.jit.si
> It's MIT, but works very well.
Thanks for the pointer.

We already tried jitsi, but I think without the bridge service (which
only seems to exist for about a year).
So, something to re-evaluate, but the last time we tried "works very
well" was the opposite of our experience due to bandwidth
requirements.


Patrick
(note to all so I don't have to sound like a grumpy, broken record: Is
it FOSS and reasonably popular? Then it's rather likely that we
already tried it)

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 17.03.2017 15:50, Juliana Rodrigues wrote:
> Don't know if anyone brought this up yet, but the FOSS communities
> that I know uses jitsi: https://meet.jit.si

Does it work better on low-end devices than it did a year ago? Back then
WebRTC was pretty much unusable in the browsers I tried on a Thinkpad
T60, mostly due to CPU limitations.
(Admittedly I haven't tried Bluejeans on my T60, so I can't compare the
two.)

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Juliana Rodrigues]

Don't know if anyone brought this up yet, but the FOSS communities
that I know uses jitsi: https://meet.jit.si

It's MIT, but works very well.



Em sex, 17 de mar de 2017 às 11:27,  escreveu:

> On 2017-03-17 06:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:
> >> 2017-03-17 13:17 GMT+01:00 Dumitru Ursu :
> >> > I never tried the web interface.
> >>
> >> We did, it failed us.
> >
> > I wish someone would have mentioned that sooner.
> >
> > What problems did people have with mumble-web, and where was the
> > websockets server running, relative to the mumble server?
> >
> >
> > //Peter
>
> I'm sorry, I have to contribute at this point.
>
> I got started with OSS in 2000 when Monta Vista Software (anybody
> remember HardHat Linux?) hired me as a FAE.
> I was teamed with a salesperson and we were trying to close business
> selling an embedded Linux distribution.
> Every 6 months or so we would have a sales meeting somewhere and
> engineering would share with us the latest product development news,
> etc.
>
> Ahead of one of these meetings I happened to be in headquarters (Santa
> Clara, CA) and remember very clearly the happy face of this engineering
> manager who had just "wasted" (my opinion) 3-5 days generating a
> presentation slide-deck with OSS (I don't even know if Open Office was
> available at that time) for the meeting, instead of spending two hours
> doing same presentation with Powerpoint.
>
> Just because I work with OSS doesn't automatically make me a zealot for
> OSS as the only way to go.  I choose the correct tool to get the job
> done.  I always hope for an OSS option, but to this day, Outlook is the
> only product Micro$oft got right and I will choose it over any of the
> OSS options I have tried as an email client.
>
> I will leave with, think of the contribution to Coreboot source code
> this energy could generate instead of spending it on fixing a problem
> that doesn't need fixing?
> Cheers,
> T.mike
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[tturne]

On 2017-03-17 06:27, Peter Stuge wrote:

Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:

2017-03-17 13:17 GMT+01:00 Dumitru Ursu :
> I never tried the web interface.

We did, it failed us.


I wish someone would have mentioned that sooner.

What problems did people have with mumble-web, and where was the
websockets server running, relative to the mumble server?


//Peter


I'm sorry, I have to contribute at this point.

I got started with OSS in 2000 when Monta Vista Software (anybody 
remember HardHat Linux?) hired me as a FAE.
I was teamed with a salesperson and we were trying to close business 
selling an embedded Linux distribution.
Every 6 months or so we would have a sales meeting somewhere and 
engineering would share with us the latest product development news, 
etc.


Ahead of one of these meetings I happened to be in headquarters (Santa 
Clara, CA) and remember very clearly the happy face of this engineering 
manager who had just "wasted" (my opinion) 3-5 days generating a 
presentation slide-deck with OSS (I don't even know if Open Office was 
available at that time) for the meeting, instead of spending two hours 
doing same presentation with Powerpoint.


Just because I work with OSS doesn't automatically make me a zealot for 
OSS as the only way to go.  I choose the correct tool to get the job 
done.  I always hope for an OSS option, but to this day, Outlook is the 
only product Micro$oft got right and I will choose it over any of the 
OSS options I have tried as an email client.


I will leave with, think of the contribution to Coreboot source code 
this energy could generate instead of spending it on fixing a problem 
that doesn't need fixing?

Cheers,
T.mike

--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Peter Stuge]

Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:
> 2017-03-17 13:17 GMT+01:00 Dumitru Ursu :
> > I never tried the web interface.
> 
> We did, it failed us.

I wish someone would have mentioned that sooner.

What problems did people have with mumble-web, and where was the
websockets server running, relative to the mumble server?


//Peter

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Patrick Georgi via coreboot]

2017-03-17 13:17 GMT+01:00 Dumitru Ursu :
> Try Mumble - it worked without issues for me, but I never tried the web
> interface.
We did, it failed us.


Patrick
-- 
Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Matthew Scott Sucherman, Paul Terence Manicle

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Dumitru Ursu]

On 03/15/2017 04:17 PM, taii...@gmx.com wrote:
> I will investigate this further, there are a few foss browser softphones
> so I will test them and get back to everyone.

Try Mumble - it worked without issues for me, but I never tried the web
interface.

https://wiki.mumble.info/wiki/3rd_Party_Applications

Dima.

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[taii...@gmx.com]

On 03/14/2017 03:33 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:


Dear Taiidan,


Am Dienstag, den 14.03.2017, 00:36 -0400 schrieb taii...@gmx.com:

Discord is proprietary software, why don't we use something free and
open source?

1. Discord is not used anymore. Where did you find this outdated
information?

https://www.coreboot.org/Coreboot_community_meeting
"If you want to install the discord application, feel free to do that."


2. As there were a lot of problems with the connection quality with
Discord, a different solution was needed. Currently, BlueJeans is used
[1], which is also proprietary, and it works quite well.

There should also be some information in the minutes [2].


I would be more than pleased to set up a SIP server or something to that
effect (I have only 10mbps upload but I know folks who will give me a
VPS if I want one).
There are plenty of FOSS softphones for every OS and you can also use a
desktop VoIP phone so it would be more convenient.

The main requirement is, that it is usable from within a browser, and
all major operating systems and browsers are supported, for example
with WebRTC, so that people aren’t forced to install anything.
BlueJeans also allows to phone in from outside.

I always disable WebRTC to avoid security issues.


If you have a free solution, that works and let’s the community meeting
to work without any issues, *and* you can set it up, I guess we will
find some volunteers to test it out. If that works, a switch can be
discussed.
I will investigate this further, there are a few foss browser softphones 
so I will test them and get back to everyone.





Thanks,

Paul


[1] https://bluejeans.com/616384323
[2] https://coreboot-meeting.pads.ccc.de/CommunityMeetingTopics?



--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[mdn]

I just found out that there's ring if anyone wants to try that.
https://ring.cx/

Le 14/03/2017 08:33, Paul Menzel via coreboot a écrit :
> Dear Taiidan,
> 
> 
> Am Dienstag, den 14.03.2017, 00:36 -0400 schrieb taii...@gmx.com:
>> Discord is proprietary software, why don't we use something free and 
>> open source?
> 
> 1. Discord is not used anymore. Where did you find this outdated
> information?
> 
> 2. As there were a lot of problems with the connection quality with
> Discord, a different solution was needed. Currently, BlueJeans is used
> [1], which is also proprietary, and it works quite well.
> 
> There should also be some information in the minutes [2].
> 
>> I would be more than pleased to set up a SIP server or something to that 
>> effect (I have only 10mbps upload but I know folks who will give me a 
>> VPS if I want one).
>> There are plenty of FOSS softphones for every OS and you can also use a 
>> desktop VoIP phone so it would be more convenient.
> 
> The main requirement is, that it is usable from within a browser, and
> all major operating systems and browsers are supported, for example
> with WebRTC, so that people aren’t forced to install anything.
> BlueJeans also allows to phone in from outside.
> 
> If you have a free solution, that works and let’s the community meeting
> to work without any issues, *and* you can set it up, I guess we will
> find some volunteers to test it out. If that works, a switch can be
> discussed.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> [1] https://bluejeans.com/616384323
> [2] https://coreboot-meeting.pads.ccc.de/CommunityMeetingTopics?
> 
> 
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Paul Menzel via coreboot]

Dear Taiidan,


Am Dienstag, den 14.03.2017, 00:36 -0400 schrieb taii...@gmx.com:
> Discord is proprietary software, why don't we use something free and 
> open source?

1. Discord is not used anymore. Where did you find this outdated
information?

2. As there were a lot of problems with the connection quality with
Discord, a different solution was needed. Currently, BlueJeans is used
[1], which is also proprietary, and it works quite well.

There should also be some information in the minutes [2].

> I would be more than pleased to set up a SIP server or something to that 
> effect (I have only 10mbps upload but I know folks who will give me a 
> VPS if I want one).
> There are plenty of FOSS softphones for every OS and you can also use a 
> desktop VoIP phone so it would be more convenient.

The main requirement is, that it is usable from within a browser, and
all major operating systems and browsers are supported, for example
with WebRTC, so that people aren’t forced to install anything.
BlueJeans also allows to phone in from outside.

If you have a free solution, that works and let’s the community meeting
to work without any issues, *and* you can set it up, I guess we will
find some volunteers to test it out. If that works, a switch can be
discussed.


Thanks,

Paul


[1] https://bluejeans.com/616384323
[2] https://coreboot-meeting.pads.ccc.de/CommunityMeetingTopics?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Martin Roth]

Mainly we're using proprietary software because it works better than
the open source alternatives we tried.

We wanted to use the open source solutions, and tried a number of
options in the months since the CCM started.  They all had serious
issues with people not being able to hear one another.  We used
discord for several months, but people kept having to disconnect &
reconnect before they could hear people.  It got to the point where I
was repeating everything that was being said because I was the only
one that everyone could hear.

We finally settled on bluejeans because it has telephone call in
support as a last resort.  If we want to try evaluating other options
again when our subscription to bluejeans expires, I'm open to that,
and we can vote on it in the community meeting like we did when we
selected Bluejeans.

If anyone wants to participate in the meeting but doesn't want to use
the proprietary software, please call in on your phone.   Here's the
global list of numbers:  https://www.bluejeans.com/numbers




Background:
See this thread from the mailing list:
https://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2016-October/082297.html
and https://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2016-November/082327.html

And see the meeting minutes of the november 10 meeting:
https://coreboot-meeting.pads.ccc.de/CommunityMeetingTopic
Trying to find a new platform for the coreboot community meeting.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s-lV3yv_fy6Z0AxceF3ZK5rQv7AWodKq6u5P_Y4Ml-4/edit?usp=sharing
Mumble: -No web client
Hangouts: -Bandwidth issues, -low maximum users (10 for public)
Jitsi: -Stability issues?
Bluejeans: -no firefox client, -$120 per year, +phone bridge
Skype: -It's skype
Tox: -no web client
Discord: -Web clients don't work well

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[Iru Cai]

I love Matrix (https://matrix.org) and there are already some public
servers (https://www.hello-matrix.net/public_servers.php), including
matrixim.cc hosted by me.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:36 PM, taii...@gmx.com  wrote:

> Discord is proprietary software, why don't we use something free and open
> source?
>
> I would be more than pleased to set up a SIP server or something to that
> effect (I have only 10mbps upload but I know folks who will give me a VPS
> if I want one).
> There are plenty of FOSS softphones for every OS and you can also use a
> desktop VoIP phone so it would be more convenient.
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>



-- 
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents. Send
OpenDocument instead! http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] How come the community meeting is hosted by proprietary software?

[mdn]

I don't have a vps but I can recommend you some good/cheep ones
https://store.vikings.net/libre-hosting-provider-crowdfunding/libre-vps-pre-order
I hope it helps

Le 14/03/2017 05:36, taii...@gmx.com a écrit :
> Discord is proprietary software, why don't we use something free and
> open source?
> 
> I would be more than pleased to set up a SIP server or something to that
> effect (I have only 10mbps upload but I know folks who will give me a
> VPS if I want one).
> There are plenty of FOSS softphones for every OS and you can also use a
> desktop VoIP phone so it would be more convenient.
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot