Later this week Tigase will be participating in the XMPP Summit 27 held on January 30 and 31st in Brussels to discuss XMPP protocol development. @andrzej will be attending the Summit.
The day after the XMPP Summit (Saturday) we will be at FOSDEM in the Realtime Lounge. If you will be at FOSDEM visit Realtime Lounge in building K if you want to discuss XMPP.
More details on FOSDEM can be found on http://fosdem.org/
Fro more about XMPP Summit visit https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Conferences/Summit_27
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tigase@fosstodon.org
@tigase @andrzej I hope SOMEONE, ANYONE will get it across that if they want more acceptance of #XMPP they need to have a way to set up a PRIVATE (NOT "in the cloud") XMPP server that's drop-dead simple to set up and configure, and that does not EVER ask for a phone number. And as long as XMPP clients refuse to talk to servers with self-signed certificates, then they need to automate getting a valid certificate and renewing it.
The reason is that more people will become familiar with XMPP is they can EASILY set up an XMPP server for family/friends use. Maybe even just for use on their own private network. If you have to deal with configuration files or strange commands entered at the command line to manage the server (I am looking at you, #prosody) that is not easy. If you have to go and try to get a certificate or renew (and figure out how let's encrypt works) that is not easy, especially if you are not running any kind of public-facing web server.
Setting up an XMPP server should be easier than setting up something like Homelab. And if the attitude is that you don't want to make it as easy as possible for users, then don't shake your fist and yell at clouds when people choose an easy alternative such as #Signal. And yes that is a cloud service and asks for a phone number, but if you are just going to try and emulate that experience then the majority of people will say "I'd rather go with the service I have heard of, and that my friends/family use, rather than this XMPP thing I have never heard of and that will likely be a pain in the ass to deal with."
(Oh, and if you have set up a XMPP server for your friends and family and have set up their phones, laptops, and desktop computers to use it, that's great and I applaud you. But 99% of people don't have a "you" in our lives. And there might be a lot more "you"'s if XMPP weren't so damn difficult.)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from maple@hear-me.social
@maple @tigase @andrzej
Snikket Hosting allows you to launch your own Snikket instances - private communication spaces for your family, friends, club or small business. No technical expertise required.
https://my.snikket.org/
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lbja@mastodon.social
@lbja @menel @tigase @andrzej Nope. You go to that site and the first thing they want you to do is "sign in or create an account." WHY??? If I am wanting to run my own local #XMPP server why can't I simply install the software from Flathub, or using apt install or something like that?
See, #Snikket is just another company that wants to be the gatekeeper for your communications, and as far as I can tell they insist that it has to cost money. I didn't care to really get into the gory details but they do not fit the definition of easy (or private). At least not for the person who would prefer to have their own private XMPP server.
So, HARD pass. If I have to use someone else's server (even if it's supposedly "my" instance - so what? If It were really MY instance I would not need to pay them anything!) why would I not just use Signal? Other than that Signal requires a phone number, I see no real advantage, and far more people have heard of or use Signal. Oh, and Signal is completely free to use.
BTW, I blocked the last person who kept harping on about Snikket even after I said "no way", don't be the second! :)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from maple@hear-me.social
@maple
You write a lot, maybe work on reading more.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pavot@fosstodon.org
@maple @lbja @menel @tigase @andrzej Snikket is just a Prosody distribution (made by one of the main Prosody developers) that is fully open-source and you can use their ready made Docker containers to host your own Snikket server completely free.
The paid hosting is just an additional service they offer for people not willing or able to self-host.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from joinjabber@indieweb.social
@joinjabber @lbja @menel @tigase @andrzej Okay, well nobody ever seems to mention the Docker option, this is the first I have heard of it. BUT... unless you already have some experience with Docker, that's still not EASY, certainly not as easy as just using Signal.
Let me give you an example of what I would consider easy, This is just an example:
You run apt install (program_name) or install it from the distro's package manager, etc. As part of the install it pops up a box asking what port you want its GUI interface to run on.
Then in your web browser you go to localhost, or the IP address of the machine it's running on if not your local machine, and the port number.
The first time it comes up it shows a setup wizard that walks you through the process of setting up the server. The user never sees a configuration or .yaml file. After that you go into a web interface where you can add or delete users, enable or disable specific XMPP functionality (such as size limits on images or files sent between users, just as an example). Thereafter all configuration is done through the web interface.
AND in the setup process it allows you to use a certificate that you already have installed, or if you don't have one it will go get one for you and automatically manage renewals.
THAT would be a relatively easy setup. And it would not require any knowledge of Docker.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from maple@hear-me.social
@maple @joinjabber @lbja @menel @tigase @andrzej honestly, that's exactly what snikket provides, just using docker rather than apt, yum etc. because docker can be used on virtually any Linux system while apt etc. can't. The docker image even auto-updates your whole docker instance, something a simple apt would not. And of course it manages a publicly trusted certificate for you as well.
It really seems to be exactly what you asked for (-apt, +docker)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Monal@fosstodon.org This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini