Re: Matrix (was Re: IM dev discussions?)
Tim Cross writes: > One thing I do find frustrating these days is the fracturing of > communications across so many different solutions. +100. I believe this is real plague for the Free Software movement. Many projects use Slack, Discord, other unfair services or private IM applications for "collaboration", while pretending to be inclusive by just throwing a code of conduct. I cannot predict the future but I sure hope mailing lists and IRC will keep being functional for another 50 years (for emails) and 35 years (for IRC). I'm glad we have https://list.orgmode.org (thanks to Eric Wong's https://public-inbox.org/README.html and Kyle's servers) and that people at SourceHut are putting efforts in making IRC more usable: https://sourcehut.org/blog/2021-11-29-announcing-the-chat.sr.ht-public-beta/ -- Bastien
Re: Matrix (was Re: IM dev discussions?)
Ihor Radchenko writes: > Tim Cross writes: > >> One thing I do find frustrating these days is the fracturing of >> communications across so many different solutions. Makes me really miss >> newsgroups! It seems like almost every project I'm interested in these >> days is using a different solution for IM. (one reason I stopped using >> IRC was because most of the projects I was interested in stopped using >> it or the majority of interesting discussions moved to some other platform). > > There are also bridges from * to IRC. See > https://web.archive.org/web/20220607072519/https://200ok.ch/posts/2019-11-01_irc_and_emacs_all_the_things.html > https://wiki.bitlbee.org/ > >> To avoid a proliferation of IM apps, I get the impression you could use >> Matrix and get access to many different messaging environments. Is this >> correct and is the Emacs matrix client mature/stable? > > Emacs matrix client is ement.el developed by @alphapapa. It has been > recently released on GNU ELPA. So, you can see it as stable enough. > > However, Matrix protocol itself is not yet stable. Something to keep in > mind. OK, thanks. Will check out those links.
Re: Matrix (was Re: IM dev discussions?)
Tim Cross writes: > One thing I do find frustrating these days is the fracturing of > communications across so many different solutions. Makes me really miss > newsgroups! It seems like almost every project I'm interested in these > days is using a different solution for IM. (one reason I stopped using > IRC was because most of the projects I was interested in stopped using > it or the majority of interesting discussions moved to some other platform). There are also bridges from * to IRC. See https://web.archive.org/web/20220607072519/https://200ok.ch/posts/2019-11-01_irc_and_emacs_all_the_things.html https://wiki.bitlbee.org/ > To avoid a proliferation of IM apps, I get the impression you could use > Matrix and get access to many different messaging environments. Is this > correct and is the Emacs matrix client mature/stable? Emacs matrix client is ement.el developed by @alphapapa. It has been recently released on GNU ELPA. So, you can see it as stable enough. However, Matrix protocol itself is not yet stable. Something to keep in mind. -- Ihor Radchenko, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/. Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode, or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
Matrix (was Re: IM dev discussions?)
Bastien writes: > Hi Ihor, > > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >> This is an option. #emacs is very too noisy for me, but #org-mode >> appears to be fairly quiet. It may work. > > I agree with Russell that we should first use the available resources, > and our IRC chan on irc.libera.chat is a good one. > > (I'm actually there BTW, lurking - you can ping me anytime as I can > read past messages, thanks to being connected with my sr.ht account.) > > But IMO there is an even stronger argument: in the case of Org, we > should encourage discussions where both "users" and "developers" can > chime in. Because many Org users are potential contributors. (This > would not be the same with another Free Software project, of course.) > > If #org-mode can serve for both general questions and dev-oriented > discussion it's good. If it becomes annoying for many readers, then > setting up transient chans is okay (even on matrix), the same way it > is okay to sit in a room and hack/discuss possible new Org features > with peers. > > In general, Org contributors with push access can fix bugs directly, > without announcing this on the mailing list. But *all other changes* > should be submitted and discussed on this mailing list. Just wondering what the better approach is these days. I've not used IRC much for a long, long time. I see discussions about matrix and believe there is an Emacs matrix package as well as matrix to IRC bridges. One thing I do find frustrating these days is the fracturing of communications across so many different solutions. Makes me really miss newsgroups! It seems like almost every project I'm interested in these days is using a different solution for IM. (one reason I stopped using IRC was because most of the projects I was interested in stopped using it or the majority of interesting discussions moved to some other platform). To avoid a proliferation of IM apps, I get the impression you could use Matrix and get access to many different messaging environments. Is this correct and is the Emacs matrix client mature/stable?
