radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Like all sensible open source communities we use IRC lots for real time communication essential to making low bandwidth decisions in a reasonable timeframe as well as socialising. 20 years ago IRC was cool but these days real-time communication in the non-geek world long since moved other places s

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Tuesday, 8 August 2017 17:52:00 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote: > Like all sensible open source communities we use IRC lots for real > time communication essential to making low bandwidth decisions in a > reasonable timeframe as well as socialising. > > 20 years ago IRC was cool but these days rea

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hi list, first of all a disclaimer: As someone heavily involved with IRC (I am freenode staff) I am of course slightly biased. However: various communities I am in, including freenode, frequently has a look as alternative protocols. They come and, compared to IRC, they also go. (https://xkc

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On martedì 8 agosto 2017 18:16:17 CEST, Luigi Toscano wrote: On Tuesday, 8 August 2017 17:52:00 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote: Like all sensible open source communities we use IRC lots for real time communication essential to making low bandwidth decisions in a reasonable timeframe as well as soci

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Il giorno Tue, 08 Aug 2017 18:16:17 +0200 Luigi Toscano ha scritto: > So -1 for moving to Rocket.Chat. -1 as well. As Luigi said, matrix.org is a better replacement because the bridge is already up there. Also, it is federated, and FOSS. -- Luca Beltrame - KDE Forums team KDE Science supporter

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 08/09/2017 01:16 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote:> We have an alternative already working, which bridges IRC (freenode.net and > OFTC): matrix.org. > I don't know how many times I should repeat this, but many people are already > using successfully (I monitor few channels, for example). > > So -1 fo

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Il 08 agosto 2017 19:09:28 CEST, Eike Hein ha scritto: > > >On 08/09/2017 01:16 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote:> We have an alternative >already working, which bridges IRC (freenode.net and >> OFTC): matrix.org. >> I don't know how many times I should repeat this, but many people are >already >> using s

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

+1 for Matrix - given that it's bridged to Freenode, all you have to do is give out Matrix links instead of linking people to IRC and they'll be able to participate in the same community. You might want to look into creating Matrix rooms manually if you want more control over the room (the ability

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hey there, I mainly contribute to the WikiToLearn project and for some months we have been using Rocket.Chat (instead of Telegram and IRC which we used in the beginning). First of all let me tell you that it is very hard to migrate users from an existing communication service to a new service. Ev

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

I never heard before we have a Matrix enabled server. -1 for Rocket Chat and I will start on Matrix to test ASAP On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 20:17 Cristian Baldi wrote: > Hey there, > > I mainly contribute to the WikiToLearn project and for some months we have > been using Rocket.Chat (instead of Teleg

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

There seems to be a native Qt/QML client for Matrix ( https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/quaternion.html), it even seems to be developed by a fellow KDE member, judging from the screenshoot. On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Cristian Baldi wrote: > Hey there, > > I mainly contribute to the Wi

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 7:08:14 PM CEST Luca Beltrame wrote: > -1 as well. As Luigi said, matrix.org is a better replacement because > the bridge is already up there. Also, it is federated, and FOSS. Another -1 from me. I use both KDE's BNC and Matrix. I started using Matrix as BNC, but I even

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:17:08 CEST schrieb Cristian Baldi: > Hey there, Hello hello, > [Various Issues I agree with] > Rocket.Chat does not have an official mobile client as of today, again > Ruquola could solve this once it is compiled for Android. Right now the > official way to use R

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:01:05 CEST schrieb Luigi Toscano: > Can rocket.chat be bridged too? Yes, but the bridge is quite buggy. In their defense: as are most other bridges, e.g. personally I think the Matrix IRC bridge is horrible, buggy (it breaks protocol in various places) and unst

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On martedì 8 agosto 2017 20:31:13 CEST, Helio Chissini de Castro wrote: I never heard before we have a Matrix enabled server. We don't (and that's the beauty of Matrix!). The reference Matrix server (matrix.org) is bridged with many big IRC networks including freenode, which means it is possi

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 8 August 2017 at 20:01, Luigi Toscano wrote: > Can rocket.chat be bridged too? If not, promoting it would create another > island. With Brooklyn, you can create n-ways bridges between Rocket.chat, IRC, Telegram and possibly many more. All of this while handling attachment support, replies, an

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 8 August 2017 at 21:46, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote: > I believe that we will only solve this problem when, no matter what > underlying technologies we choose, we will be able to provide a user > experience as nice as Telegram with a simple server, hosted by us, > which allows for federated login.

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On martedì 8 agosto 2017 21:46:58 CEST, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote: On 8 August 2017 at 20:01, Luigi Toscano wrote: Can rocket.chat be bridged too? If not, promoting it would create another island. With Brooklyn, you can create n-ways bridges between Rocket.chat, IRC, Telegram and possibly many

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 8 August 2017 at 19:51, Christian Loosli wrote: > Out of interest: what exactly does IRC lack? There are 4 things coming to mind > for me, all of them with my personal opinion: Option for full names, photos of people, timezone, e-mail addresses. Just a few of the useful and user friendly featu

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 8 August 2017 at 19:51, Christian Loosli wrote: > Out of interest: what exactly does IRC lack? Would be worth asking the teams who don't use IRC why they don't. Sysadmins use Slack, VDG uses Hangouts, Promo uses Telegram... anyone from those teams able to tell us why? Jonathan

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Dienstag, 8. August 2017 22:46:18 CEST Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > On martedì 8 agosto 2017 21:46:58 CEST, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote: > > On 8 August 2017 at 20:01, Luigi Toscano wrote: > >> Can rocket.chat be bridged too? If not, promoting it would > >> create another island. > > > > With Brookl

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 8 August 2017 at 21:46, Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > I'm not sure I get this argument. Do we have evidence that new contributors > are scared by IRC? How is signin up on RocketChat/Telegram/whatever easier > than using http://webchat.freenode.net/ ? Teams including VDG, Promo and Sysadmins chose

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

2017-08-08 17:52 GMT-03:00 Jonathan Riddell : > On 8 August 2017 at 19:51, Christian Loosli wrote: >> Out of interest: what exactly does IRC lack? There are 4 things coming to >> mind >> for me, all of them with my personal opinion: > > Option for full names, photos of people, timezone, e-mail ad

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 21:52:12 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > On 8 August 2017 at 19:51, Christian Loosli wrote: > > Out of interest: what exactly does IRC lack? There are 4 things coming to > > mind > > for me, all of them with my personal opinion: > Option for full names, IRC has the

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

I guess as KDE's "IRC guy" (I maintain Konversation) I should chime in here. I like IRC. I regard IRC as important. I think without IRC none of the past 20 years of KDE would have happened, and the reasons for IRC being a successful technology for us and many others start with "chatting is nice"

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 22:44:40 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > On 8 August 2017 at 21:46, Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > > I'm not sure I get this argument. Do we have evidence that new > > contributors > > are scared by IRC? How is signin up on RocketChat/Telegram/whatever easier > > than usi

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 08/08/2017 05:57 PM, Eike Hein wrote: > But what I don't want us to do is abandon IRC without retaining > what made IRC successful and good. Some of these things areed > technical points that form our most basic requirements: > > - Free > - Protocol spec > - Self-hostable > - Federated > - Mult

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Christian Loosli wrote: > Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:17:08 CEST schrieb Cristian Baldi: > > Hey there, > > Hello hello, > > > [Various Issues I agree with] > > > Rocket.Chat does not have an official mobile client as of today, again > > Ruquola could solve thi

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

FWIW, I didn't keep up with Matrix to well in recent times, but I remember having a look at it back when it made its first splash (the LWN article at all) and at the time I considered it the most promising-looking IRC replacement attempt yet. It had some of the traits of other attempts that faile

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hey, just to add to the list of options. Recently GitLab purchased and open sourceed gitter https://gitter.im >From the list of features it does look great and is being used by tons of open source projects, mostly in the web development field. You can self host it but from reading a bit it looks

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Dienstag, 8. August 2017 23:52:40 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > Looking at #kde-devel just now it says: > > <-- swati_27 (uid130066@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-abaollxcgicrxgwg) > > has quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) > > <-- nowrep (~david@kde/developer/drosca) has quit (Quit:

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Wednesday 09 August 2017 09:45:13 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > That's not the case for modern protocols where people only stop seeing the > conversation if they actively leave the group (which is whey they do show > that, but it happens far less often than people quitting their IRC client). > > A

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hi! > On 9. Aug 2017, at 10:08, Adriaan de Groot > wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 August 2017 09:45:13 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: >> That's not the case for modern protocols where people only stop seeing the >> conversation if they actively leave the group (which is whey they do s

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hi, I have opened right now konversation with 25 channels, 10 from them corporate channels and many others to talk to developers from different projects, KDE telepathy for my Google and facebook contacts, Telegram for my KDE and openSUSE support questions since users seem to be moving there and I

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On martedì 8 agosto 2017 23:43:25 CEST, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: On Dienstag, 8. August 2017 22:46:18 CEST Elvis Angelaccio wrote: On martedì 8 agosto 2017 21:46:58 CEST, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote: On 8 August 2017 at 20:01, Luigi Toscano wrote: ... I'm not sure I get this argument. Do we have

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:05:16 CEST schrieb Jonathan Frederickson: > Matrix has all of these, with the exception of perhaps "Multi-identity" > and "Anonymous." (But it's HTTP, so you can tunnel it over Tor, there's > no real name requirement as it's an open federated protocol, and you can >

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Post Scriptum, as I discussed this and learned that what I hinted at in the - cafe channel yesterday is public information: We (freenode) are looking into support (not moving to, mind) for rocket. Some details can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/eximious/posts/ 10155436766365761?comment_

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

We have a GSoC student working on a RocketChat<~>Telegram<~>Irc bridge which as of now has support for files, images, video messages and so on. Take a look here http://rivadavide.blogspot.com/2017/08/brooklyn-02-released-ready-for.html . We are using it at WikiToLearn and it is working fine. On W

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Hi, Yup, I am aware, I already did spread that freenode internally a couple of weeks ago (when I saw the first post on planet KDE), thanks. Our current issue is more the mix of authentication systems and to use something like SAML or the likes to integrate them, which, as far as I am aware,

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 9 August 2017 at 10:46, Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > On the other hand, I see new contributors on IRC all the time who ask "hey, > how do I build $app?" or "hey, how do I contribute to KDE?". So maybe > different teams have just different preferences. So I'm still not convinced > that a new contri

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

El dimecres, 9 d’agost de 2017, a les 9:45:13 CEST, Thomas Pfeiffer va escriure: > On Dienstag, 8. August 2017 23:52:40 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > > Looking at #kde-devel just now it says: > > > <-- swati_27 (uid130066@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-abaollxcgicrxgwg) > > > has quit (Quit: Connec

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > You can't expect me to read a 200 messages backlog in 20 channels just in > case > something important was said while i was away. Well, I keep running irssi in a screen session because... I feel I have to, but I am getting better at not replying t

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

> On 09 Aug 2017, at 19:57, Albert Astals Cid wrote: >> >> The bigger issue seen in what Jonathan pasted isn't that IRC clients show >> when people join or leave a group. The issue is that it shows when people >> close their IRC client. And the problem is not that it shows them, but that >> this

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > You can't expect me to read a 200 messages backlog in 20 channels just in case > something important was said while i was away. > > Also one of the reasons of why i hate to use Telegram for anything that > "actually matters" is this "alway

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

> On 10 Aug 2017, at 15:27, Marco Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Albert Astals Cid wrote: >> You can't expect me to read a 200 messages backlog in 20 channels just in >> case >> something important was said while i was away. >> >> Also one of the reasons of why i hate to us

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

LibreOffice are having a similar discussion https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/projects/msg02257.html They want to continue using IRC though which means fragmentation would continue. They find rocket.chat to have some limitations including that the clients aren't as bug free as they oug

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 17:25:14 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > LibreOffice are having a similar discussion > > https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/projects/msg02257.html > > They want to continue using IRC though which means fragmentation would > continue. Maybe someone should

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 17:25:14 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > > LibreOffice are having a similar discussion > > > > https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/projects/msg02257.html > > > > They want to continue u

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 20:31:22 CEST schrieb Thomas Pfeiffer: > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 17:25:14 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > > > LibreOffice are having a similar discussion > > > > > > https://listarchiv

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 20:38:11 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 20:31:22 CEST schrieb Thomas Pfeiffer: > > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > > Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 17:25:14 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell: > > >

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 21:22:04 CEST schrieb Thomas Pfeiffer: > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 20:38:11 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 20:31:22 CEST schrieb Thomas Pfeiffer: > > > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > > >

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On August 11, 2017 4:22:04 AM GMT+09:00, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: >On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 20:38:11 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: >> Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 20:31:22 CEST schrieb Thomas >Pfeiffer: >> > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli >wrote: >> > > Am Don

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Il 10 agosto 2017 22:22:04 EEST, Thomas Pfeiffer ha scritto: >On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 20:38:11 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: >> Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2017, 20:31:22 CEST schrieb Thomas >Pfeiffer: >> > On Donnerstag, 10. August 2017 18:40:34 CEST Christian Loosli >wrote: >> > > Am Donner

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

While I generally agree with your feeling that the feeling for IRC was a bit negative, I disagree here: Il 10 agosto 2017 22:34:19 EEST, Christian Loosli ha scritto: > >If people want to switch themselves: already possible, with or without >this >thread and the etherpad. > >The original topi

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Luigi says it well: there is a point to this exercise in figuring out what is desired / required of an IM system. That can be interesting in and of itself -- I've gone and interviewed my daughter on her use of different IM systems, and found a whole hierarchy of needs and fine distinctions in th

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Thursday 10 August 2017 21:34:19 Christian Loosli wrote: > People pointed out, various times by now, that IRC is the > lowest common denominator and that the rest not only can be bridged, but is > bridged. The requirements list can also be used to check whether the bridges support all t

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. The available Matrix clients are currently not quite as polished as their competition (specifically Slack/Discord), but Matrix does have their features in its scope, inclu

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 11 August 2017 at 13:49, Eike Hein wrote: > I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm > increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. Am I right in thinking that the bridging in Matrix/Riot isn't the same as various IRC/Telegram channels have where message

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On venerdì 11 agosto 2017 16:25:40 CEST, Jonathan Riddell wrote: On 11 August 2017 at 13:49, Eike Hein wrote: I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. Am I right in thinking that the bridging in Matrix/Riot i

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Am Freitag, 11. August 2017, 21:49:11 CEST schrieb Eike Hein: > I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm > increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. > > [...] There are currently various issues with the bridge including missing protocol support (e.g. i

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

Here's a radical proposal: why don't we just work towards improving the IRC protocol, make the protocol available over WebSockets, and try to push the whole thing as a W3C informational RFC? On 10 Aug 2017 10:18 pm, "Eike Hein" wrote: > On August 11, 2017 4:22:04 AM GMT+09:00, Thomas Pfeiffer <

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, Boudhayan Gupta wrote: > Here's a radical proposal: why don't we just work towards improving the IRC > protocol, make the protocol available over WebSockets, and try to push the > whole thing as a W3C informational RFC? Best idea yet! -- Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.o

Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 08/12/2017 04:22 AM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, Boudhayan Gupta wrote: > >> Here's a radical proposal: why don't we just work towards improving the IRC >> protocol, make the protocol available over WebSockets, and try to push the >> whole thing as a W3C informational RFC? >

Re: [kde-community] Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 09:49:11PM +0900, Eike Hein wrote: > > I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm > increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. We have the possibility of moving to Matrix and allowing individual IRC channels to move to real Matrix ch

Re: [kde-community] Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

> On 15 Aug 2017, at 11:42, Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 09:49:11PM +0900, Eike Hein wrote: >> >> I've given some more thought to Matrix as a contender and I'm >> increasingly liking this option among the available contenders. > > We have the possibility of moving to Mat

Re: [kde-community] Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

On 15 August 2017 at 10:44, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > The VDG has contributed to the Etherpad, so their requirements are covered in > there. How to evaluate if Matrix/Riot covers them? Stuff like "Have a UI that someone who is < 20 years old and cares about the looks of a UI would use" is hard t

Re: [kde-community] Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat

> On 15 Aug 2017, at 12:09, Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > On 15 August 2017 at 10:44, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: >> The VDG has contributed to the Etherpad, so their requirements are covered >> in there. > > How to evaluate if Matrix/Riot covers them? Stuff like "Have a UI > that someone who is <

Please participate in the requirements Etherpad (Was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Just in case my other email linking to the Etherpad was overlooked by some of you because it was buried too deep in the thread: Let's make this discussion productive by collecting the requirements KDE has for a chat / IM system to become our standard in this document: https://notes.kde.org/p/KD

Re: Please participate in the requirements Etherpad (Was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Thursday 10 August 2017 00:15:21 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > Just in case my other email linking to the Etherpad was overlooked by some > of you because it was buried too deep in the thread: > > Let's make this discussion productive by collecting the requirements KDE has > for a chat / IM system t

Re: Please participate in the requirements Etherpad (Was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Thursday 10 August 2017 10:57:29 Adriaan de Groot wrote: > This is a microcosm, a textbook example, a beautiful illustration of > exactly what the culture-worries in the IM thread are about Perhaps to clarify: the above is a philosophical point (see what happens when you start messing around

Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Hi everyone, now that hopefully most of the emotional arguments in fiery support of one protocol or another have been exchanged, I'd suggest we move things towards a practical approach and ask ourselves: What are the requirements that KDE has for an instant messaging / chat system for it to be

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Hi, in addition to the list Eike gave in his other mail, which I fully agree with, the following are mandatory: - Has to run everywhere. Means: desktop, mobile, server, *BSD, Linux, Windows, Mac ... Maybe doesn't have to run on a smartwatch or toaster, but I'd prefer to be able to also chime

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have on > Telegram. But why it is mandatory in a somewhat more professional > environment

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Can we please keep this thread limited to collecting-requirements, and therefore arguing over which requirements are required or what their weight is? That, rather than re-hashing the discussion elsewhere on which platform with which sub- and superset of features is popular in which location.

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 09:36:42 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why > > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have > > on > > Tel

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Il 09.08.2017 09:58 Thomas Pfeiffer ha scritto: On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 09:36:42 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why people want them for friends and family, I

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On mercoledì 9 agosto 2017 00:19:32 CEST, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: Hi everyone, now that hopefully most of the emotional arguments in fiery support of one protocol or another have been exchanged, I'd suggest we move things towards a practical approach and ask ourselves: What are the requiremen

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

> On 09 Aug 2017, at 09:57, Adriaan de Groot wrote: > > Can we please keep this thread limited to collecting-requirements, and > therefore arguing over which requirements are required or what their weight > is? That, rather than re-hashing the discussion elsewhere on which platform > with whi

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wednesday 09 August 2017 00:19:32 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > - FOSS clients or at least API available for desktop as well as mobile > These clients must > - have a UI that someone who is < 20 years old and cares about the looks of > a UI would use (or if those don't exist, we need to have people

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

>We should probably also ask the sysadmin team whether they would be willing to maintain our own chat server. That's "maintain a third chat server". They maintain both kdetalk (jabber) and Conpherence (phabricator) already. David

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On mercoledì 9 agosto 2017 11:47:24 CEST, David Edmundson wrote: We should probably also ask the sysadmin team whether they would be willing to maintain our own chat server. That's "maintain a third chat server". They maintain both kdetalk (jabber) and Conpherence (phabricator) already. Righ

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > On mercoledì 9 agosto 2017 11:47:24 CEST, David Edmundson wrote: >>> >>> We should probably also ask the sysadmin team whether they would be >>> willing to maintain our own chat server. >> >> >> That's "maintain a third chat server". >> >>

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

El dimecres, 9 d’agost de 2017, a les 9:36:42 CEST, Thomas Pfeiffer va escriure: > On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote: > > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why > > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I ha

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 10 > years, with predominantly people younger than 25, Is there any such organization at all? > which uses email as their > main format of text communication Even without thi

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

> On 09 Aug 2017, at 20:00, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > >> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 10 >> years, with predominantly people younger than 25, > > Is there any such organization at all? > Sure there is

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > > On 09 Aug 2017, at 20:00, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > > >> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than > >> 10 > >> years, with predominantly people younger than 25

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > > On 09 Aug 2017, at 20:00, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > > >> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger > than 10 > >> years, with predominantly people younger th

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive or helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to tacke a few points that are, in my opinion, odd at best. First let's tackle that mysterious group of < 20 year olds: > > Is there any such org

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Christian Loosli wrote: > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very long > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the many > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat > systems, to be

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On 2017 M08 9, Wed 00:19:32 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: ... > - Easy way to share files > A solution that puts files automatically on share.kde.org and embeds them > from there works only if we have people willing and able to implement that > feature into a desktop- as well as mobile client One th

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Christian Loosli wrote: > Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive or > helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to > tacke a few points that are, in my opinion, odd at best. > > First let's tackle that

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Am Mittwoch, 9. August 2017, 16:12:51 CEST schrieb Martin Klapetek: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Christian Loosli wrote: > > Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive > > or > > helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to > > tacke

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

FWIW, I moderate a ~300k subscriber subreddit on the side, and that community substantially migrated away from Snoonet to Discord. I see that a lot on reddit now. Cheers, Eike -- Plasma, apps developer KDE e.V. vice president, treasurer Seoul, South Korea

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Christian Loosli - 09.08.17, 22:26: > > Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like > > to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential, > > exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were. > > Who is going to be there for these new talents that lack e

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Hey everyone, just a quick progress update: I have now cleaned up https://notes.kde.org/p/KDE_IM_requirements by removing duplicates, removing all discussion / comments (so only plain requirements are left) and rewording most requirements to that they have a somewhat common wording. The next

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

Hi Thomas, thanks for this issue forward with a rather constructive approach! > On 16. Aug 2017, at 03:20, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > I have now cleaned up https://notes.kde.org/p/KDE_IM_requirements > by removing > duplicates, removing all discus