Follow

So I'm having my grub and reading a random hacker news thread where people are discussing the relative merits of vs vs and here I am thinking “ for god's sake! We don't need no bloody silos!”

@one
That's one hell of a confused opinion.

So is an old and clunky protocol (like , you add) which therefore should be replaced with something new like . Which is an API. Which uses as its transport protocol.

That's just one example. To your credit, you managed to squeeze an impressive number of contradictions and non sequiturs in a very short space.

@one

Incidentally, I'm curious about your experience. I use it for inter application signaling and very happy with it. It has also been my instant messaging solution for the last 18 years.

@61 Extremely fragmented.

Matching up XEPs for an adequate mobile experience is absolute insanity.

Not all XMPP servers support all XEPs. And you can't even tell what a single server supports for most of the XEPs.

On the IM client side of things, it's the same story. Until very recently, push support was basically non-existent, so XMPP mobile clients would keep an open TCP socket, wasting resources, and reconnecting on every connection change.

@61 In addition, XMPP simply was not designed with built-in encryption. Much like HTTP and E-Mail, and we had to add TLS, which for compatibility reasons, is optional. And for E2E, it's up to the client to support whatever they want. It really is a mess.

HTTP/2 fixes many of the problems of "classic" HTTP. Why can't XMPP evolve and stop being a dumpster fire of XEPs? That would be super cool.

@one @61

When you talk about default encryption. What kind of encryption are you talking about? In XMPP, I know at least 5 types of e2e encryption)

(By the way, there is default e2e encryption in XMPP, on some servers)

@404_city @61 and that’s exactly what I mean. 5 ways of achieving essentially the same thing. There should only be on way, and it should be a default.

But I was talking about transport encryption in this case. Like TLS for HTTP, XMPP can use TLS too, but it feels like a dirty hack rather than design use case.

@one @61
>and that’s exactly what I mean. 5 ways of achieving essentially the same thing.

XMPP is a network for instant messengers. This is not a messenger. You can use one messenger and one server and get 100% compatibility.

@404_city @61 uh... yeah... that’s... not how software engineering works. Like, at all. This is precisely my justification for backing my claims of XMPP being a bad design from the beginning.

@one @61
You do not understand. XMPP is more than an instant messenger. This is a network for instant messengers. XMPP is created so that you can send messages from Facebook to telegrams, matrix, tox. XMPP is not specifically looking for 100% compatibility.

@404_city @61 so XMPP is a good IM platform because it is not an IM platform? That’s what you’re trying to say?

@one @61
I say that different companies can not create identical instant messengers. XMPP is designed for real use by large companies as a transport between different messengers. XMPP is a special Internet for instant messengers.

@one @61
There is no single rule. No one decides in XMPP what is bad, what is good.
No one forces you to use one type encryption that you consider unsafe. XMPP is freedom.

@one @61 There are old customers. There are new customers. New customers support new extensions. We have XMPP not one client and not one server and therefore not everything is updated on time.

@one
Oh dear! 🙄

> Not all XMPP servers support all XEPs.

What part of “extensible” did you not understand?

> And you can't even tell what a single server supports for most of the XEPs.

What part of service discovery are you not aware of?

@61
there is compliance.conversations.im

I like xmpp to, but I must say the desktop clients are a way better for Matrix (Riot).
Luckily Conversejs improves fast
@one

@61 I do not suggest replacing XMPP with Matrix. But even if I was, I'm referring to the IM part of XMPP.

Of course XMPP is that, and much more. There are many Internet services that use XMPP messaging, but you know very well that's not what people think about when they talk about XMPP. Lol.

XMPP is awesome for IM, more and more servers are supporting more and more xeps each day, and clients are becoming extremely easy and comfortable to use. It's lovely to see an "ancient" protocolo so alive.
XMPP is awesome for IM, more and more servers are supporting more and more xeps each day, and clients are becoming extremely easy and comfortable to use. It's lovely to see an "ancient" protocolo so alive.
XMPP is awesome for IM, more and more servers are supporting more and more xeps each day, and clients are becoming extremely easy and comfortable to use. It's lovely to see an "ancient" protocolo so alive.
XMPP is awesome for IM, more and more servers are supporting more and more xeps each day, and clients are becoming extremely easy and comfortable to use. It's lovely to see an "ancient" protocolo so alive.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
En OSM Town | Mapstodon for OpenStreetMap

A Mapstodon instance for the OpenStreetMap Community (English language)! This site is under construction, and may change. Our francophone friends have a Mastodon instance: fr.osm.social