+1 On Tue, Jun 16, 2026, 11:18 Adam Monsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> This experiment seems to be going well. The new (Matrix) chat > <https://app.element.io/#/room/%23fineract:matrix.org> is more active > than the old (Slack) chat <https://mifos.slack.com/archives/C028634A61L>. *I'd > like to deprecate and archive the old (Slack) chat so we only have one > source of truth. Please discuss and/or add your informal +1/-1.* > > I'm a +1. I like that Matrix is mature and backed by a non-profit that is > value-aligned with our community <https://matrix.org/foundation/about/>. > I like that it is open source, open data (anyone can click "export chat" at > any time and get the full archive), and free to use (gratis). I like that > the Fineract space is owned and controlled by the PMC > <https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?fineract>, same as Fineract > itself. This allows us data sovereignty and vendor neutrality. I like that > there are many desktop and mobile clients. > > I find Matrix to be a bit slower and more fiddly (e.g. client > verification) than Slack and Discord, but reasonably so. Matrix > performance, stability, and usability has improved in recent years and will > continue to improve. If not, we can change clients, migrate to our own > server, or migrate to the next new platform since we'll own and control our > tools and data. > > Bridging (connecting Slack to Matrix) is likely possible, but I do not > recommend it. This adds a point of failure and maintenance burden. Also, no > two chat protocols have feature parity: Differences in features typically > cause a degraded experience on one or both ends of the bridge. > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 8:30 AM Adam Monsen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I only join rooms linked or recommended to me first-hand. And I always >> refuse DMs unless I already am familiar with the person or bot trying to DM >> me. I recommend both practices when it comes to Matrix/IRC/Discord/etc. >> >
