XSF Discussion - 2024-02-20

How is xmpp different to Matrix?

They sound very similar

Matrix is the upgrated, improved, fixed version of XMPP

edhelas, are you trying to get your XSF membership revoked? because you can just not reapply, you know, no need for trying out the removal process. (just kidding :))

GregorTacTac: they are different protocols that both can be used to create a federated IM solution.

one is a federated append-only database which is attempting to be a messaging system, the other is a messaging system trying to be a state synchronisation tool.

Improved? How?

How how how

> one is a federated append-only database which is attempting to be a messaging system, the other is a messaging system trying to be a state synchronisation tool. English please

» [01:08:55] <edhelas> Matrix is the upgrated, improved, fixed version of XMPP This man is incorrect and you should never listen to a single word he says.

I heard xmpp is inefficient with server resources

GregorTacTac: the biggest differences are technical in nature

Is it April 1st already? I cannot possibly be hearing this misinformation in the XSF Discussion MUC.

GregorTacTac: I think you might be confusing it with some other protocol 🙂

All you need to know is XMPP > Matrix in every conceviable way. I'm not even joking. Matrix is complete trash. XMPP is king. XMPP sits atop his golden throne because XMPP deserves it.

Wirlaburla, please stop. this kind of oversimplification only causes trouble.

It is not oversimplification.

+1

Wirlaburla, it is.

Wirlaburla: all you need to know is that they are trolling 🙂

MattJ: I have been got.

I have been fooled.

> Wirlaburla: all you need to know is that they are trolling 🙂 Be not anymore ↺

I had the papers on the superiority of XML stanzas at the ready.

And if all else failed, I would've just mentioned that it is silly that an entire chat protocol requires HTTP to function.

But alas, the folder shall be shelved yet again until another day.

I will not deny that XMPP has almost become a religion for me. I pray for good XML and clean XEPs every night before I go to bed. ✏

Have my respect Wirlaburla bruh

And you shall have mine.

🤝

https://share.conversations.im/gregortactac/C06roS06ZKAsyqmF/c96RdOxtRMm45RCy4UM3FQ.jpg

In their document information appendices, XEP-0136 defines that it is superseded by XEP-0313, but XEP-0313 does not define that it supersedes 136. That's just an oversight, right?

Wirlaburla: modern XMPP requires http to function too, nothing wrong with http, use the right tool for the right job

Don't make the same mistake I see many make that is confusing the sad state of web browser monopolies and bad electron apps with http

hey. if you remember i talked about safety/moderation a while ago here. I have decided to split it into two papers due to the volume of the work. The Papers are called Personal Space Safety and Community Space Safety. Im working on Community Space Safety right now. Community Space Safety as in: > Community Space Safety is the process in which a community of people protects itself from spam or harassment from people outside of the group and how it handles mediation and disagreements inside the group when these arise. from the paper. This can be Mastodon, xmpp group chats, discord, facebook groups, etc. You can find the initial rough draft here https://git.sr.ht/~msavoritias/Guile_XMPP/tree/main/item/Documentation/Papers/Community%20Space%20Safety.org Its basically the structure, scope, methodology, why and what, and introduction. As you see in the paper it will be focused on xmpp because of the library i am making based on spritely (another big piece of the work to be done later but not of importance atm), and it will mention shortcomings and steps that xmpp can take to be better. both practically by clients and theoretically in the protocol. I know that implementations lack behind the XEPs obviously. :) Would there be interest in funding this work in the scope of XMPP platform/protocol development?

> I know that implementations lag behind XEPs No reason they should, imho the better XEPs are implemented and sometimes even deployed before being submitted

also not sure if i should have written about the funding request here or council i opted for here since it can generate more discussion

XSF doesn't really control any funding, except you can apply to that one thing through the XSF to handle the paperwork for you?

I bet folks are around that could help with an nlnet application though

I will add this to my reading list for when I get to a PC, I can't seem to flow it right to read on mobile :(

moparisthebest: 'view raw' lets the text flow fine for me on mobile ✏

meson: thanks!

> Wirlaburla: modern XMPP requires http to function too, nothing wrong with http, use the right tool for the right job HTTP is usually not the right tool for any job. Modern XMPP doesn't need HTTP to function, but it does provide some legimate uses. Matrix, on the ither hand, runs entirely through an HTTP connection for everything. That is stupid.

"HTTP is usually not the right tool for any job." I should specify when not using it for its intended purpose.

> &gt; Wirlaburla: modern XMPP requires http to function too, nothing wrong with http, use the right tool for the right job > HTTP is usually not the right tool for any job. Modern XMPP doesn't need HTTP to function, but it does provide some legimate uses. Matrix, on the ither hand, runs entirely through an HTTP connection for everything. That is stupid. You mean Websocket ? ↺

Matrix entirely runs on HTTP polling.

I have no problem with web interfaces (Like HTTP polling or websockets) as long as it is an alternative.

Wirlaburla: what's the non-http alternative for http file upload? That's the main place in XMPP where it seems perfectly appropriate and there aren't good alternatives

My point is the main protocol being through HTTP.

You could easily use XMPP without ever touching HTTP. You cannot use Matrix without HTTP.

And if you seriously do want an alternative to HTTP File Upload, it was XEP-0065 albiet its flaws and issues.

moparisthebest: jingle FT

Or that.

> moparisthebest: jingle FT goffi: not actually a solution ↺

why?

note that I have nothing against HTTP

How do I share a file with all of you with it in here? Also for the people who are offline now and will only see it from mam in 2 days when I'm offline?

I don't have anything against HTTP File Upload. It has its purpose.

moparisthebest: jingle ft to a server

But it is also not a required aspect of XMPP to function.

moparisthebest: you can absolutely use jingle to upload file on server, I'm doing it in Libervia with my file sharing component.

> moparisthebest: jingle ft to a server singpolyma: so just reinventing HTTP poorly then, gross ↺

Or improving in it rather than reinventing. And being specific and fit for purpose

but anyway, it's not my fight, at least not tonight, I was just answering the question above

good night .o/

Jingle FT can use http itself of course, which wouldn't be my favourite but I'd like a bit better anyway

Wirlaburla: it is required for modern XMPP with multi-client users and MUCs

It is not required.

It may be required for your own use case but you do not actually need it to use XMPP.

I consider file sharing required for a modern chat experience

We're talking about as a messaging protocol, something Matrix very much wants to be other than just a "modern chat".

Even IRC worked this way, want to share a file, upload it to an http server and paste a link

Okay, but still not required.

And if all HTTP suddenly stops working, you'd have bytestreams.

And Jingle FT

Which don't work in muc or 1:1 with multiple devices

Or when one is offline

There are better hills to die on then this, aren't there?

I'll die on the hill that HTTP is ass when used as the primary protocol for a chat service, epsecially one trying to be in the position of "THE" chat service (*cough* Matrix).

It's not like this will bring anything to the o anyone

And better ways to solve things than by discussing :)

I'm not sure, I've seen a lot of unexplained HTTPhobia lately

Might I ask why you are defending it?

I just said, the phobia is unexplained :P

Yeah, but the best approach is to just ignore then I guess. It's not like one could convince someone of anything in this "debate" Everyone just repeating their view ✏

Menel: I think you misunderstood the conversation.

I doubt that...

look if the response to "how to do it without HTTP?" is "we'll just poorly re-invent our own http!!!!!" then the debate has already ended, http wins

I get it you hate matrix and http

» [14:42:00] <moparisthebest> look if the response to "how to do it without HTTP?" is "we'll just poorly re-invent our own http!!!!!" then the debate has already ended, http wins So go to Matrix then.

“Geh doch nach drüben“

I would wager only 1 person in this room would support matrix, it's terrible, XMPP is the best, but "http" is not a reason

» [14:42:03] <Menel> I get it you hate matrix and http I do not hate HTTP, I hate that it is being used for more than it was made for. It makes those options incredibly inefficient and bloated.

Why are we discussing matrix in the xsf room?

damnit I can't believe you are gonna make me defend matrix.... http is not the reason matrix is inefficient or bloated

I have no issue with HTTP File Upload, nor any of the HTTP transports for XMPP. No problems at all. I think those are suitable ways for doing what they intend to do. My problem is when the primary, the very core of a protocol, is reliant on HTTP when it is not a web-only technology. Matrix wants to be the messaging protocol (like XMPP) but the first problem in its design is HTTP.

» [14:43:39] <moparisthebest> http is not the reason matrix is inefficient or bloated I never said that was the only reason, but it is a part of a long list of incredibly stupid decisions on their part.

no, the first problem would be not actually being a message passing protocol but some eventually consistent graph monstrosity

» [14:43:38] <Menel> Why are we discussing matrix in the xsf room? To be fair, I forgot. I said something, I slept, and then I woke up and here I am.

» [14:45:31] <moparisthebest> no, the first problem would be not actually being a message passing protocol but some eventually consistent graph monstrosity We'll just agree its a problem then?

matrix? 100% http? no

Yes.

In order to ever use Matrix, you have to connect to a server that is just running an over-engineered webserver.

Then once connected, every single message you recieve is through a JSON response from an HTTP URI.

whether anyone here likes it or not XMPP's future is fully over http too, if you've been paying attention, everything is dead or going over http, it's the new IP :P

You do know you're preaching to the choir right? Wirlaburla matrix bashing is so 2019

That is a ridiculous statement. I am talking to you right now over nothing but TCP.

» [14:52:07] <Menel> You do know you're preaching to the choir right? Wirlaburla matrix bashing is so 2019 I will Matrix bash until XMPP is on top.

But you're annoying xmpp users only

> That is a ridiculous statement. I am talking to you right now over nothing but TCP. how do you know I'm not connected over http ? or that our servers aren't :D ↺

How so?

don't worry, you're annoying at least one matrix user too, thanks to the magic of bridging :)

» [14:53:16] <moparisthebest> how do you know I'm not connected over http ? or that our servers aren't :D I know my server isn't, and it doesn't matter how you connect to XMPP because none of it matters to my connection.

Couldn't you find an off topic room for that?

If I can connect and communicate just fine through XMPP because of TCP, then I am perfectly happy.

» [14:54:31] <Menel> Couldn't you find an off topic room for that? Perhaps, but the discussion originated here neither of us have stopped to move it yet so *shrug*.

Yeah, and seems you never will

*shrug*

And I connect over TLS hooow???

I'm confident that restating the same opinions ad infinitum will eventually result in the heat death of the universe, admittedly probably not with any change of opinion or signal amongst the noise.

Nothing is being restated.

Progress has been made. First it was HTTP File Upload, now we're at TCP and TLS.

Do the XMPP Mucs have MUC PMs?

MUC whisper? yeah

Then moparisthebest, if you wish to discuss/debate this further, feel free through PMs.

> Okay, but still not required. Do you mean the protocol XMPP is not coupled to the transport/OSI layer, and Matrix is coupled to it? Too much coupling is always bad ↺

» [15:12:33] <topgun> > Okay, but still not required. » Do you mean the protocol XMPP is not coupled to the transport/OSI layer, and Matrix is coupled to it? » » Too much coupling is always bad Yes. All communication through Matrix requires HTTP, along with all of its headers, and then it entirely communicates on its own form of BOSH. That includes both client-to-server and server-to-server communications.