• 48 Posts
  • 498 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 9th, 2023

help-circle

  • would you recommend Snikket server (or Prosody) for 1:1, group calls and screen sharing?

    Answering this first so it doesn’t get buried down. Screen sharing wouldn’t be supported by xmpp since its just messaging, but I believe Jitsi has that feature. But for the rest, snikket and conversations (for android) I would recommend, yes.

    When I decided to try XMPP, I had to do a lot of research to decide which applications I should use for the server and client.

    Whatever is the first answer you get from a web search should be fine. Most sources recommend conversations for client, but all the other recommendations you’ll see are good too. For server, the easiest to setup is snikket, but all the other and up to date implementations should work okay, although they might need some configuration if you want all the modern messaging features.

    If we told two people to use these two software independently, they would start using Matrix much more faster than XMPP.

    Why do you think so? Let’s assume a user who doesn’t self host. XMPP clients are far more stable and error free, whereas matrix has random issues every now and then, especially with encryption and public groups.

    XMPP clients are a lot more customizable and come in different models. Matrix has only one client that works well (and some forks of it that look roughly the same). I’d say that’s a win for XMPP for new users.

    Now let’s say it’s a self hosting user. I don’t need to say much here, matrix is notorious for self hosting issues, and being a massive resource hog. XMPP, you have snikket, which works out of the box without issues and can be hosted on a raspberry pi even.

    I may be biased here, so I urge you to tell me, in what way would a new user adopt matrix faster? I can tell you one. Matrix has corporate funding and has managed to advertise better. That’s their only win.


  • With all due respect, this is a very biased view

    Wanna set up a server? Prosody (which has a hassle free out of the box experience through snikket)

    Need a client? Conversations

    The default softwares are easy to use for new users.

    For matrix, however, you are forced to use synapse. You complain that xmpp is not a single protocol, but in reality, all the major implementations are compatible. Can you say the same about matrix? The other implementations aren’t even close to achieving this.

    Xmpp’s extensions are a powerful feature, and the issues you think it presents do not exist with xmpp anymore, but is actually the status quo for Matrix.


  • XMPP Works fine when it’s setup or when you don’t manage the hosting, but God is it painful to self host an xmpp server.

    I recommend you use snikket if you’re having trouble selecting plugins, because it has everything you need out of the box and its super easy to setup.

    It even needs a special setup to work on restricted networks via port 80/443 because it wants port 5222 and 5223,

    Isn’t that just a configuration in prosody / snikket? What implementation did you use that didn’t let you configure this? Or are you expecting major implementations to default to port 80/443? Because that would be quite problematic.

    Most basic communication features in 2024 such as replies reactions quoting threads etc.etc. are unsupported ootb, and you need both a client that supports the extensions (often very slow to adapt “new” standards AND a server that has enabled the plugin for that feature.

    This is already supported by the major clients. I know for sure that conversations on android (and I suppose the many clients based on it) supports it. For server implementations, it is available out of the box on snikket, and it is a plugin you have to enable on prosody.


  • matcha_addict@lemy.loltoFediverse@lemmy.worldMatrix 2.0 Is Here!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    It’s the issues with XMPP’s spec: you don’t just use XMPP, you use XMPP + your favorite optional spec implementations.

    Sorry, what’s the issue exactly? You called it an issue and I fail to see the problem. The X in XMPP stands for “extensible”, so it is being used precisely as intended, so that is still XMPP.

    You could use your favorite extensions if you want, but all up-to-date implementations follow the standard defined by XMPP, and it includes all features of a modern messaging experience

    If your friends aren’t on the same server/client combo then you won’t be able to communicate with them (effectively).

    You have to be going out of your way to have a non-compliant server or client. This isn’t really an issue that happens.

    If it were to get a single, matrix-style “spec release” (think an aggregation of existing features into one collection) that contains/requires a bunch of modern chat features I’ve come to expect from programs

    That’s how it is today though! I see the issue, you said you haven’t tried it in years. Admittedly, I only started with XMPP 2 years ago but haven’t had any of the issues you mentioned. Not sure when this became the status quo, but it is pretty awesome. Maybe it is worth trying again :)


  • Have you used XMPP recently and ran into the issue of non-obscure servers, clients, or self-hostable implementations using different extensions or not supporting them? (I actually haven’t experienced this even on the obscure ones, but can’t confirm for all of them). Please do not make that accusation, because that I’d really not what happens in reality.

    it’s hardly the standard

    Why not when… It literally is? And all major implementations follow it? That is by definition a standard.

    and we’re not really talking about plain XMPP then anymore.

    Why not? “extensible” is in the name. It is meant to be extended. The protocol is being used exactly as planned and intended.


  • matcha_addict@lemy.loltoFediverse@lemmy.worldMatrix 2.0 Is Here!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Can you please explain why? A quick look at the spec for both protocols shows you that matrix is literally a hundred times more complex, so I don’t understand the basis of the contrary. The matrix creators have shown they are okay with increased complexity under the pretext of a more complete experience, but in reality, XMPP has achieved the same features with far less complexity.

    If you’re speaking about self hosting, again, I don’t see how, as matrix is notorious for self hosting issues. XMPP’s snikket works out of the box and has all the commonly used features and plugins pre-baked. The underlying prosody implementation is a step down, but is also quite easy as long as you know what plugins and options to activate (and if you don’t, then use snikket).













  • I have considered this approach, but there are several things I had issues with.

    • there is still a degree of latency. It’s not a deal breaker, but it is annoying
    • clipboard programs don’t work. They copy to the remote host’s clipboard. I bet there’s a solution to this, but I couldn’t find it from spending a limited time looking into it.
    • in the rare case the host is unreachable, I am kinda screwed. Not a deal breaker since its rare, but the host has to be always on, whether the git solution only requires it to be on when it syncs

    To address the issues you brought up:

    • less commits: this would be resolved by squashing every time I make a commit. The auto save commits will be wiped. If I really hated commits, I could just amend instead of commit, but I rather have the history.
    • forgetting to git pull: the hooks I talked about will take care of that. I won’t have to ever worry about forgetting anymore.