Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Mirko Boehm - KDE]

Hi Thomas,

thanks for this issue forward with a rather constructive approach!

> On 16. Aug 2017, at 03:20, Thomas Pfeiffer  wrote:
> 
> I have now cleaned up  https://notes.kde.org/p/KDE_IM_requirements 
>  by removing
> duplicates, removing all discussion / comments (so only plain requirements are
> left) and rewording most requirements to that they have a somewhat common
> wording.
> 
> The next step will be to turn this into a Kano survey which will be used to
> prioritize them (will do that tomorrow).


I think this is exactly what is needed. The requirements collected right now 
are a superset of anything anyone could ever wish for. I am really interested 
in seeing them prioritised and the bottom 20% of them scrapped :-)

Best,

Mirko.
--
Mirko Boehm | mi...@kde.org | KDE e.V.
FSFE Fellowship Representative, FSFE Team Germany
Qt Certified Specialist and Trainer
Request a meeting: https://doodle.com/mirkoboehm



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

Hey everyone,
just a quick progress update:

I have now cleaned up  https://notes.kde.org/p/KDE_IM_requirements by removing 
duplicates, removing all discussion / comments (so only plain requirements are 
left) and rewording most requirements to that they have a somewhat common 
wording.

The next step will be to turn this into a Kano survey which will be used to 
prioritize them (will do that tomorrow).

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Martin Steigerwald]

Martin Klapetek - 10.08.17, 12:34:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Martin Steigerwald 
> wrote:
> > Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
> > > > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a
> > > > very
> > > > long
> > > > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of
> > > > the
> > > > many
> > > > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new
> > > > chat
> > > > systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these 
> > > >mystical
> > > > tweens so much?
> > > 
> > > Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
> > > reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
> > > Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
> > > to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
> > > exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
> > > And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
> > > be in it for the long run.
> > 
> > Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:
> > 
> > To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is
> > absolutely needs to be black or white:
> > 
> > *Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.
> > 
> > Seriously?
> > 
> > I mean: Seriously?
> > 
> > 
> > There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is
> > none
> > of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use cases?
> > 
> > Why do you see the need to exclude either one of the groups?
> 
> As you're quoting my email - where are you reading this?
> That's not what I wrote at. all. I merely stated that we should
> cater to younger engineers. Not once I suggested and will not
> suggest to disregard the old timers. That was twisted in replies
> following my email.

Martin, I noted a general impression I got from the thread.

You are right, you didn´t write that.

This either/or approach is what in my perception was in this thread since 
quite a while… probably not (always) explicitely written out… but between the 
lines.

It might have been wiser to choose a different post – or even just don´t quote 
any post at all –  to reply to with this.

Sorry.

Martin
-- 
Martin

Re: How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Martin Klapetek]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Martin Steigerwald 
wrote:

> Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
> > > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a
> very
> > > long
> > > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the
> > > many
> > > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new
> chat
> > > systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these
> mystical
> > > tweens so much?
> >
> > Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
> > reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
> > Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
> > to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
> > exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
> > And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
> > be in it for the long run.
>
> Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:
>
> To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is
> absolutely needs to be black or white:
>
> *Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.
>
> Seriously?
>
> I mean: Seriously?
>
>
> There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is
> none
> of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use cases?
>
> Why do you see the need to exclude either one of the groups?
>

As you're quoting my email - where are you reading this?
That's not what I wrote at. all. I merely stated that we should
cater to younger engineers. Not once I suggested and will not
suggest to disregard the old timers. That was twisted in replies
following my email.

Cheers
--
Martin Klapetek

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution

[Jonathan Riddell]

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 08:51:53PM +0200, Christian Loosli wrote:
> Then, on the subject of emojis, stickers or even the protocol used being so 
> important: 
> 
> Let's see what others do.

My proposal is to lead rather than follow others.  We can learn from their 
experience but leading would be better.

> But even if it would: to be honest, if someone decides what project they want 
> to contribute due based on what chat protocol they use internally, I'm 
> personally not sure if that is a well suited candidate due to rather odd 
> priorities.

It's not a concious decision, it's a preference which would lead to being being 
more or less involved.

Jonathan

Re: How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Christian Loosli]

> What I’ve argued strongly against is the standpoint that we should stick
> with the status quo.

The status quo _is_ things with the advantages of Telegram or Matrix 
available, since these two are already bridged. 

Hence my earlier 

> Last but not least: if IRC really is so much of an issue, which I doubt: 
there are solutions readily available (Tg and Matrix bridge) or available in 
the future (Rocket bridge) which do resolve the problem whilst still 
maintaining compatibility for people who prefer what worked for 20 years and 
still works.  So the reasons to continue with a replacement I can see are 
either "We want to get rid of the other one completely and enforce this one" 
or "we want it NOW", both of which I heavily have to disagree with  [...]

If you want Rocket, for whatever reason, see my other post which was so far 
mostly ignored. 

Re: How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> On 10 Aug 2017, at 10:22, Luigi Toscano  wrote:
> 
> Il 10 agosto 2017 10:24:08 EEST, Martin Steigerwald  ha 
> scritto:
>> Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
 But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a
>> very
 long
 history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of
>> the
 many
 tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new
>> chat
 systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these
>> mystical
 tweens so much?
>>> 
>>> Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
>>> reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
>>> Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
>>> to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
>>> exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
>>> And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
>>> be in it for the long run.
>> 
>> Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:
>> 
>> To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is 
>> absolutely needs to be black or white:
>> 
>> *Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.
>> 
>> Seriously?
>> 
>> I mean: Seriously?
>> 
>> 
>> There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is
>> none 
>> of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use
>> cases?
> 
> I see it differently; I see people wanting something that also works with IRC 
> (so bridges, starting with the ones that already works) and people that don't 
> want IRC even if it's working in the background without then having to care 
> about it.

Who did ever say that? I certainly didn’t.
Throughout the entire discussion, I have always been 99.99% certain that we 
will end up with something that’s bridged to IRC.
Why would we not? There is not really a downside to it as long as the bridge 
works well, is there?

What I’ve argued strongly against is the standpoint that we should stick with 
the status quo.

Re: How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Luigi Toscano]

Il 10 agosto 2017 10:24:08 EEST, Martin Steigerwald  ha 
scritto:
>Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
>> > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a
>very
>> > long
>> > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of
>the
>> > many
>> > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new
>chat
>> > systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these
>mystical
>> > tweens so much?
>> 
>> Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
>> reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
>> Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
>> to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
>> exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
>> And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
>> be in it for the long run.
>
>Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:
>
>To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is 
>absolutely needs to be black or white:
>
>*Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.
>
>Seriously?
>
>I mean: Seriously?
>
>
>There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is
>none 
>of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use
>cases?

I see it differently; I see people wanting something that also works with IRC 
(so bridges, starting with the ones that already works) and people that don't 
want IRC even if it's working in the background without then having to care 
about it.


>
>Why do you see the need to exclude either one of the groups?

Exactly my point.


-- 
Luigi

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution

[Eike Hein]

On 08/09/2017 07:19 AM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> Must-have:

- dfaure is there so I can ask KIO questions

(IRC fails that currently.)


Cheers,
Eike

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Martin Steigerwald]

Christian Loosli - 09.08.17, 22:26:
> > Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
> > to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
> > exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
> 
> Who is going to be there for these new talents that lack experience? 
> 
> You need both, thus catering for one group specifically is, in my opinion, 
> stupid. 

*thank you*

I just wrote a post about making this very clear.

Please stop fighting "either / or". It won´t work. It easily visible from the 
structure of this thread already. How can some new chat system lovers and IRC 
users be happy?

Thanks,
-- 
Martin

How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Martin Steigerwald]

Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
> > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very
> > long
> > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the
> > many
> > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat
> > systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these mystical
> > tweens so much?
> 
> Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
> reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
> Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
> to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
> exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
> And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
> be in it for the long run.

Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:

To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is 
absolutely needs to be black or white:

*Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.

Seriously?

I mean: Seriously?


There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is none 
of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use cases?

Why do you see the need to exclude either one of the groups?

I know for me personally: Its either IRC or something that feels like it, is 
as lightwight as it, as standardized as it and as free software as it (i.e. 
offers free software server and client). I use Quassel IRC and I am perfectly 
fine with following IRC channels using it. Heck even most other communities I 
communicate with like for games are on IRC. Basically it is all there.

But… I wouldn´t like to exclude anyone who does not want to use IRC either… so 
can´t there be one chat system with IRC + something new?

Also I think for a community like KDE there needs to be balance between:

- How much does KDE community adapts to its potential new members.

- How much potential new members adapt to the KDE community.

There needs to be a balance between what works already – and I get the 
impression that both mailing lists and IRC do work for KDE community, just 
look at the accomplishments, just look at the achievements and you can know 
that beyond any trace of doubt – and something new that could work for new 
people. Also do we really know who these potential new people are and what 
their preferences would be without a survey?

I have been in Spain lately, and I learnt a little bit of the language. 
Seriously I wouldn´t expect anyone to speak german just cause I happen to have 
my holidays there. However if someone there can speak some english or even a 
few words of german whenever I got stuck I appreciated it as well.

I follow developements regarding new chat systems myself, I see that IRC is 
dated… yet I also see that it works. For me it is no "either / or"… and I 
kindly ask you to consider that there can be an "and" that is more inclusive 
than any of the "either / or" options. Requirement for this "and" would be 
bridging, i.e. no matter which chat system out of the supported ones one uses… 
she will always see all the messages from people who use other supported chat 
systems.

From previously just reading this thread I am almost completely certain that 
there won´t be an agreement on one of the "either / or" options. Without 
recycling this further it can be pretty much clear that here are people who 
favor IRC and people who favor something new. So rather than wasting any more 
energy fighting against one another over which option will win… I think the way 
forward would be to find a way to make both groups happy.

Thank you for considering my plea to bring some sanity to this discussion 
again.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Eike Hein]

FWIW, I moderate a ~300k subscriber subreddit on the side, and that community 
substantially migrated away from Snoonet to Discord. I see that a lot on reddit 
now.


Cheers,
Eike
-- 
Plasma, apps developer
KDE e.V. vice president, treasurer
Seoul, South Korea

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Christian Loosli]

Am Mittwoch, 9. August 2017, 16:12:51 CEST schrieb Martin Klapetek:
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Christian Loosli  wrote:
> > Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive
> > or
> > helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to
> > tacke a few points that are, in my opinion, odd at best.
> > 
> > First let's tackle that mysterious group of < 20 year olds:
> > > > Is there any such organization at all?
> > > 
> > > Sure there is! Look at the tech startup scene, or the games industry.
> > > But okay, let’s say “predominantly younger than 30” to make it an easier
> > > task.
> > 
> > But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very
> > long
> > history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the
> > many
> > tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat
> > systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these mystical
> > tweens so much?
> 
> Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
> reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.

Yes. Young talents will fade away for various reasons, be it life, having kids 
and a family or starting a career. 

> Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
> to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
> exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.

Who is going to be there for these new talents that lack experience? 

You need both, thus catering for one group specifically is, in my opinion, 
stupid. 

> > Are they the holy grail that saves KDE and worth alienating
> > the people who are not this particular group?
> 
> It's not mutually exclusive.

This thread has a couple of very good examples of people feeling alienated due 
to it, so I'd dare to say it is a problem. 

> > Even if that is the case, to answer your question:  Yes, there are such
> > companies, plenty even. Basically a lot of companies which are exactly not
> > in
> > the small bubble that is  "tech start up", but other industries. Also
> > companies that actually have to do business with other companies, where
> > mail
> > simply still is the standard.
> > 
> > 
> > Then, on the subject of emojis, stickers or even the protocol used being
> > so
> > important:
> > 
> > Let's see what others do. Let's take our main, most famous friendly
> > competitor
> > GNOME. They even run their very own IRC network still, and actively code
> > new
> > IRC applications.
> > Mozilla? Own IRC network.
> > Reddit, quite the place for young techies and startup? Created their own
> > IRC
> > network. Hardly turning off or away people, it seems. If we fail to
> > attract
> > fresh blood, then maybe the problem is not actually "we use IRC".
> > 
> > But even if it would: to be honest, if someone decides what project they
> > want
> > to contribute due based on what chat protocol they use internally, I'm
> > personally not sure if that is a well suited candidate due to rather odd
> > priorities.
> 
> I think your view is a different angle - it's not that they would
> choose a project to contribute to based on what chat they use, but
> they would choose a project they feel most comfortable in. And yes
> day to day communication does make a big part of that comfort.

Dear god no. Most of that is actually the content, and not the protocol of 
that communication. The bickering we have on mailing lists, including people 
threatening to leave the project and year old feudes cooking up occasionally 
is way more a reason to stay away from a project than the protocols they may 
use.

> No matter how you look at it, IRC /is/ behind any other IM apps/protocols
> today. Young engineers communicate and prefer to communicate
> differently than you or me. 

I lead a team of young  (19 - 26) engineers, and I'm afraid I have to disagree 
with such blanket statements. Not to mention that freenode, _the_ very IRC 
thing, has a big amount of staffers that are between 20 and 25 and also people 
below 20. 

> I think it's absolutely crucial to understand
> them and their views/ways/whatever. Neglecting them would be a mistake.

Alienating long term contributors, switching around protocols fragmenting the 
community and not gaining new people regardless, because it was other things 
that kept them away, would be a mistake. 

> Cheers
> --
> Martin Klapetek

Kind regards, 

Christian

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Martin Klapetek]

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Christian Loosli  wrote:

> Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive or
> helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to
> tacke a few points that are, in my opinion, odd at best.
>
> First let's tackle that mysterious group of < 20 year olds:
>
> > > Is there any such organization at all?
> >
> > Sure there is! Look at the tech startup scene, or the games industry.
> > But okay, let’s say “predominantly younger than 30” to make it an easier
> > task.
>
> But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very
> long
> history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the
> many
> tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat
> systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these mystical
> tweens so much?


Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
be in it for the long run.


> Are they the holy grail that saves KDE and worth alienating
> the people who are not this particular group?
>

It's not mutually exclusive.


> Even if that is the case, to answer your question:  Yes, there are such
> companies, plenty even. Basically a lot of companies which are exactly not
> in
> the small bubble that is  "tech start up", but other industries. Also
> companies that actually have to do business with other companies, where
> mail
> simply still is the standard.
>
>
> Then, on the subject of emojis, stickers or even the protocol used being so
> important:
>
> Let's see what others do. Let's take our main, most famous friendly
> competitor
> GNOME. They even run their very own IRC network still, and actively code
> new
> IRC applications.
> Mozilla? Own IRC network.
> Reddit, quite the place for young techies and startup? Created their own
> IRC
> network. Hardly turning off or away people, it seems. If we fail to attract
> fresh blood, then maybe the problem is not actually "we use IRC".
>
> But even if it would: to be honest, if someone decides what project they
> want
> to contribute due based on what chat protocol they use internally, I'm
> personally not sure if that is a well suited candidate due to rather odd
> priorities.
>

I think your view is a different angle - it's not that they would
choose a project to contribute to based on what chat they use, but
they would choose a project they feel most comfortable in. And yes
day to day communication does make a big part of that comfort. No
matter how you look at it, IRC /is/ behind any other IM apps/protocols
today. Young engineers communicate and prefer to communicate
differently than you or me. I think it's absolutely crucial to understand
them and their views/ways/whatever. Neglecting them would be a mistake.

Cheers
--
Martin Klapetek

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Alexander Neundorf]

On 2017 M08 9, Wed 00:19:32 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
...
> - Easy way to share files
> A solution that puts files automatically on share.kde.org and embeds them
> from there works only if we have people willing and able to implement that
> feature into a desktop- as well as mobile client

One thing I like in the google group chat is that you can post images and you 
can do simple free-hand drawing on these images (e.g. draw an arrow pointing 
to something). I think it has also builtin functionality for screenshots.
Both combined make it easy to talk about GUI stuff.
Do other IMs support this too ? (I haven't seen this in mattermost and slack)

Alex

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Christian Loosli wrote:

> But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very long 
> history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the many 
> tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat 
> systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these mystical 
> tweens so much? Are they the holy grail that saves KDE and worth alienating 
> the people who are not this particular group? 

Indeed.

> Let's see what others do. Let's take our main, most famous friendly 
> competitor 
> GNOME. They even run their very own IRC network still, and actively code new 
> IRC applications. 
> Mozilla? Own IRC network. 
> Reddit, quite the place for young techies and startup? Created their own IRC 
> network. Hardly turning off or away people, it seems. If we fail to attract 
> fresh blood, then maybe the problem is not actually "we use IRC". 

Actually... That is a problem, at least for me, personally. Github is a place 
where everything gets mashed down to faceless anonymity. If our code would move
to Github we would lose our sense of community for ever. But... On Freenode, 
in the same application, the same mental space, I can be around in kde, kde on 
windows, krita, but also inkscape and scribus and vc and qt and some other 
things
where I might just lurk and learn, or sometimes be useful.

I've never lurked on gimp's irc channel, because it's on another network, and I
would feel like I were intruding. It would be better if they were on freenode 
as well.

The biggest problem I face on #krita isn't a lack of people joining, but a 
surfeit of people thinking it's something like a one-on-one scripted company
support chat. Having multiple conversations going on at the same time is very
mind-boggling for some people. But that's not in any of the lists of problems
I've seen in this discussion.

> 
> But even if it would: to be honest, if someone decides what project they want 
> to contribute due based on what chat protocol they use internally, I'm 
> personally not sure if that is a well suited candidate due to rather odd 
> priorities.

AOL

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Christian Loosli]

Okay, this is more and more drifting away from being remotely productive or 
helpful, but as I provided a working solution on top level, I feel free to 
tacke a few points that are, in my opinion, odd at best. 

First let's tackle that mysterious group of < 20 year olds: 

> > Is there any such organization at all?
> 
> Sure there is! Look at the tech startup scene, or the games industry.
> But okay, let’s say “predominantly younger than 30” to make it an easier
> task.

But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a very long 
history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of the many 
tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new chat 
systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these mystical 
tweens so much? Are they the holy grail that saves KDE and worth alienating 
the people who are not this particular group? 

Even if that is the case, to answer your question:  Yes, there are such 
companies, plenty even. Basically a lot of companies which are exactly not in 
the small bubble that is  "tech start up", but other industries. Also 
companies that actually have to do business with other companies, where mail 
simply still is the standard. 


Then, on the subject of emojis, stickers or even the protocol used being so 
important: 

Let's see what others do. Let's take our main, most famous friendly competitor 
GNOME. They even run their very own IRC network still, and actively code new 
IRC applications. 
Mozilla? Own IRC network. 
Reddit, quite the place for young techies and startup? Created their own IRC 
network. Hardly turning off or away people, it seems. If we fail to attract 
fresh blood, then maybe the problem is not actually "we use IRC". 

But even if it would: to be honest, if someone decides what project they want 
to contribute due based on what chat protocol they use internally, I'm 
personally not sure if that is a well suited candidate due to rather odd 
priorities.

Last but not least: if IRC really is so much of an issue, which I doubt: there 
are solutions readily available (Tg and Matrix bridge) or available in the 
future (Rocket bridge) which do resolve the problem whilst still maintaining 
compatibility for people who prefer what worked for 20 years and still works. 
So the reasons to continue with a replacement I can see are either "We want to 
get rid of the other one completely and enforce this one" or "we want it NOW", 
both of which I heavily have to disagree with for various reasons already 
mentioned. 

TL;DR: no. 

Kind regards, 

Christian 

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Martin Klapetek]

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer 
wrote:

>
> > On 09 Aug 2017, at 20:00, Boudewijn Rempt  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> >
> >> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger
> than 10
> >> years, with predominantly people younger than 25,
> >
> > Is there any such organization at all?
> >
>
> Sure there is! Look at the tech startup scene, or the games industry.
> But okay, let’s say “predominantly younger than 30” to make it an easier
> task.
>

Can confirm. I work in a tech startup less than 10 years
old with people predominantly younger than 30. We use
emails internally only for announcements (max 2 per week).
For everything else we use instant messaging. In fact, we
have all the tooling hooked up to the IM, so even new code
review or failed CI pings you on the IM. Heck, we even hooked
the main door lock to the IM, so you can open doors with
a simple message (has proper auth and everything).

>From seeing other startups in the neighbourhood, I can
tell you that all of those I've seen are like that - using whatever
is the latest hip IM client because startups have to be "cool".
And that raised a generation of engineers that take it for granted
that orgs they'd be potentially interested in use some 21st
century chat stack (but not only, GitHub is another great example).
If they don't, they're automatically less interested.

I agree with Thomas. If this is the kind of talent we'd like to
attract, we need evolve.

Cheers
--
Martin Klapetek

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:

> 
> > On 09 Aug 2017, at 20:00, Boudewijn Rempt  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > 
> >> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 
> >> 10 
> >> years, with predominantly people younger than 25, 
> > 
> > Is there any such organization at all?
> > 
> 
> Sure there is! Look at the tech startup scene, or the games industry. 
> But okay, let’s say “predominantly younger than 30” to make it an easier task.

Oh, you're talking about companies, not organizations.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:

> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 10 
> years, with predominantly people younger than 25, 

Is there any such organization at all?

> which uses email as their 
> main format of text communication

Even without this rider.

> , I maintain my statement. 

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Albert Astals Cid]

El dimecres, 9 d’agost de 2017, a les 9:36:42 CEST, Thomas Pfeiffer va 
escriure:
> On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote:
> > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why
> > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have
> > on
> > Telegram. But why it is mandatory in a somewhat more professional
> > environment is a bit beyond me, people also still use e-mail despite it
> > neither supporting stickers nor emojis  (Well, unless html mails, but
> > thank
> > god that at least there we agree that it is an abomination)
> 
> It's just that young people do _not_ use email unless absolutely forced to.
> There is a reason why it can take days until someone replies to an email on
> the VDG mailing list, while the various Telegram groups the VDG is in are
> buzzing with activity.
> Or why my coworkers (professional environment, but a gaming company so
> predominantly people younger than me) hardly ever send an email but do
> everything on Slack.
> 
> Emoji certainly are not the only reason for that, but they are an important
> contributor to making communication on Telegram or Slack feel more natural
> than fun than email. Email is not fun at all.
> 
> So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 10
> years, with predominantly people younger than 25, which uses email as their
> main format of text communication, I maintain my statement.

Remember, while trying to cater for those mythical young people that are not 
contributing just because we use IRC, we should try to not scare away those 
actual contributors that actually like using IRC.

Cheers,
  Albert

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> On 09 Aug 2017, at 16:19, Eike Hein  wrote:
> 
> On August 9, 2017 4:28:49 PM GMT+09:00, Thomas Pfeiffer 
>  wrote:
>> On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 02:14:44 CEST Jonathan Frederickson wrote:
>>> On 08/08/2017 06:19 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
 - Support for a decent set of Emoji (not just the ones you can
>> create
 using
 ASCII chars).
 Using Unicode to display them is probably okay, as long as users
>> can
 choose
 them from a menu in the client instead of having to paste them from
 KCharSelect.
 This, too, might sound like nice-to-have for many, but not having
>> them
 would cut us off from the younger generation. Yes, they use them
>> even in
 a "professional context". Believe me, I'm seeing it in action every
>> day
 at work.
>>> I'm not sure custom emoji should be a requirement. That pretty
>> heavily
>>> limits your options, and even some of the major chat platforms
>>> (WhatsApp, iMessage, Hangouts) don't support this.
>> 
>> That's why I wrote that Unicode is okay. Unicode now has quite a range
>> of 
>> emoji and that set is growing steadily, so that's fine. Not optimal
>> because 
>> they're black and white, but fine. 
>> Just not only ASCII ones.
>> 
>> Custom emoji are nice, but definitely not a must.
> 
> This is technically completely wrong - nothing prevents Unicode emoji from 
> being colored, there are multiple color font technologies in use and Linux 
> toolkits support some of them.
> 
> A "Unicode emoji" is just a number encoded to a bit sequence. How it's 
> displayed once found is up to the client. Unicode is just how you agree on 
> exchanging and storing the character.
> 
Actually I realized this myself today when I actually looked at examples of 
Unicode emojis in some standard fonts and saw that yes, those were colored.

Okay cool then Unicode it is :)

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Ben Cooksley]

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Elvis Angelaccio
 wrote:
> On mercoledì 9 agosto 2017 11:47:24 CEST, David Edmundson wrote:
>>>
>>> We should probably also ask the sysadmin team whether they would be
>>> willing to maintain our own chat server.
>>
>>
>> That's "maintain a third chat server".
>>
>> They maintain both kdetalk (jabber) and Conpherence (phabricator) already.
>
>
> Right. Though I think Conpherence is provided by phabricator "for free" (no
> additional maintainance required).

The only "additional" maintenance as it were is the Phabricator
notifications server component Aphlict, which you need to run anyway
to be notified of changes to pages by others (it's what allows the
Page has changed, please reload messages)

So yes, it's maintenance free.

>
>>
>> David
>>
>

Cheers,
Ben

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[David Edmundson]

>We should probably also ask the sysadmin team whether they would be
willing to maintain our own chat server.

That's "maintain a third chat server".

They maintain both kdetalk (jabber) and Conpherence (phabricator) already.

David

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Marco Martin]

On Wednesday 09 August 2017 00:19:32 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:

> - FOSS clients or at least API available for desktop as well as mobile
> These clients must
>  - have a UI that someone who is < 20 years old and cares about the looks of
> a UI would use (or if those don't exist, we need to have people willing and
> able to write them before switching)

..and that someone that is >20 would use as well, as many times to have pretty 
ui is just chosen the easy route of cutting away useful features

> Nice-to-haves:
> 
> - Bridge to IRC
> For the transitional period or for people who just refuse to change their
> habits

this is absolutely a must, our current community on all our irc channels is 
our biggest asset, and i see in this thread is treated more or less like a 
nuisance (like Eike said, there would have not been 20 years of KDE without 
it) i would even say a complete bridge to freenode already there is a must.

-- 
Marco Martin

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> On 09 Aug 2017, at 09:57, Adriaan de Groot  wrote:
> 
> Can we please keep this thread limited to collecting-requirements, and 
> therefore arguing over which requirements are required or what their weight 
> is? That, rather than re-hashing the discussion elsewhere on which platform 
> with which sub- and superset of features is popular in which location.

You are right, inviting people to challenge my proposals right away wasn’t such 
a good idea in hindsight.

Furthermore, this sub-thread has reminded me again that while email is great 
for having permanently and publicly archived discussions, it is terrible for 
collecting information (any chat protocol would be equally terrible for that, 
of course) because contributions by different people tend to become spread over 
multiple emails.

So to fix this as well as to keep information gathering separate from 
discussion, let’s do the former in a format that makes more sense for it:

https://notes.kde.org/p/KDE_IM_requirements

Once we’ve agreed on a list (if we ever do), it could make sense to move that 
to the Community wiki for searchability and everything, but for brainstorming 
Etherpad usually works better.

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 09:36:42 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote:
> > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why
> > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have
> > on
> > Telegram. But why it is mandatory in a somewhat more professional
> > environment is a bit beyond me, people also still use e-mail despite it
> > neither supporting stickers nor emojis  (Well, unless html mails, but
> > thank
> > god that at least there we agree that it is an abomination)
> 
> It's just that young people do _not_ use email unless absolutely forced to.
> There is a reason why it can take days until someone replies to an email on
> the VDG mailing list, while the various Telegram groups the VDG is in are
> buzzing with activity.
> Or why my coworkers (professional environment, but a gaming company so
> predominantly people younger than me) hardly ever send an email but do
> everything on Slack.
> 
> Emoji certainly are not the only reason for that, but they are an important
> contributor to making communication on Telegram or Slack feel more natural
> than fun than email. Email is not fun at all.

I meant ore natural _and_ fun than email, of course. And here we have another 
thing  feature I sorely miss whenever I have to use one of the old 
communication protocols: The ability to edit my messages.

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Adriaan de Groot]

Can we please keep this thread limited to collecting-requirements, and 
therefore arguing over which requirements are required or what their weight 
is? That, rather than re-hashing the discussion elsewhere on which platform 
with which sub- and superset of features is popular in which location.


Top-posting, because this is email and I can annoy people by doing so.
GPG-signing, because this is email and I can do so.
Taking the time to write a longer response, because this is email and I can do 
so(*).

On Wednesday 09 August 2017 09:36:42 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote:
> > PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why
> > people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have

IM is communication, and communication is culture. Let's not forget that. Paul 
Adams and I once experimented with the "dude" communication protocol, which 
contains only one word, "dude", and a vast range of intonations, tone-
lengthenings, and eye-rolls. It was a very effective and largely encrypted 
real-time, face-to-face, communications mechanism. Hard to teach to others, 
though.

Culture, though, is learned. And culture is often local. As Christian and 
Thomas's messages express, the locality matters; the population matters. So 
before we dive into "this is a useless feature for me", let's inventory. 
Collect requirements. Then we can also describe, later, which populations or 
cultures have that specific requirement.

> It's just that young people do _not_ use email unless absolutely forced to.

Driving this kind of stake in the sand isn't helping the discussion. Also, we 
are not talking about email -- which is a non-ephemeral, searchable, 
permanently archivable, signable, threadable communications mechanism -- right 
now.

And you know what? Even using email is a cultural thing; culture is all about 
forcing people to do things. I forced my kids to eat with knife and fork, 
because that's my culture. I forced them to stop pooping their pants. I forced 
them to look at me (and not their phone) when talking to me. They forced me to 
accept that some music, created in the 1980's, does not suck. Culture can 
develop and change, too.

> There is a reason why it can take days until someone replies to an email on
> the VDG mailing list, while the various Telegram groups the VDG is in are
> buzzing with activity.

So? Again: collect requirements. Then talk about which requirements are 
inspired by what kind of community / culture / population.

[ade]


(*) But email is not an IM / chat functionality, so it is expected to have 
totally different characteristics from an IM client.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 01:59:00 CEST Christian Loosli wrote:

> PS: on the importance of emojis and (animated) stickers: I can see why
> people want them for friends and family, I love the sticker packs I have on
> Telegram. But why it is mandatory in a somewhat more professional
> environment is a bit beyond me, people also still use e-mail despite it
> neither supporting stickers nor emojis  (Well, unless html mails, but thank
> god that at least there we agree that it is an abomination)

It's just that young people do _not_ use email unless absolutely forced to. 
There is a reason why it can take days until someone replies to an email on 
the VDG mailing list, while the various Telegram groups the VDG is in are 
buzzing with activity.
Or why my coworkers (professional environment, but a gaming company so 
predominantly people younger than me) hardly ever send an email but do 
everything on Slack.

Emoji certainly are not the only reason for that, but they are an important 
contributor to making communication on Telegram or Slack feel more natural 
than fun than email. Email is not fun at all.

So unless someone can give me an example of an organization younger than 10 
years, with predominantly people younger than 25, which uses email as their 
main format of text communication, I maintain my statement. 

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Mittwoch, 9. August 2017 02:14:44 CEST Jonathan Frederickson wrote:
> On 08/08/2017 06:19 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > - Support for a decent set of Emoji (not just the ones you can create
> > using
> > ASCII chars).
> > Using Unicode to display them is probably okay, as long as users can
> > choose
> > them from a menu in the client instead of having to paste them from
> > KCharSelect.
> > This, too, might sound like nice-to-have for many, but not having them
> > would cut us off from the younger generation. Yes, they use them even in
> > a "professional context". Believe me, I'm seeing it in action every day
> > at work.
> I'm not sure custom emoji should be a requirement. That pretty heavily
> limits your options, and even some of the major chat platforms
> (WhatsApp, iMessage, Hangouts) don't support this.

That's why I wrote that Unicode is okay. Unicode now has quite a range of 
emoji and that set is growing steadily, so that's fine. Not optimal because 
they're black and white, but fine. 
Just not only ASCII ones.

Custom emoji are nice, but definitely not a must.

Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution

[Jonathan Frederickson]

On 08/08/2017 06:19 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> - Support for a decent set of Emoji (not just the ones you can create using 
> ASCII chars).
> Using Unicode to display them is probably okay, as long as users can choose 
> them from a menu in the client instead of having to paste them from 
> KCharSelect.
> This, too, might sound like nice-to-have for many, but not having them would 
> cut us off from the younger generation. Yes, they use them even in a 
> "professional context". Believe me, I'm seeing it in action every day at work.

I'm not sure custom emoji should be a requirement. That pretty heavily
limits your options, and even some of the major chat platforms
(WhatsApp, iMessage, Hangouts) don't support this.

Unicode emoji support, absolutely.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution (was: Re: radical proposal: move IRC to Rocket.Chat)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

Hi everyone,
now that hopefully most of the emotional arguments in fiery support of one 
protocol or another have been exchanged, I'd suggest we move things towards a 
practical approach and ask ourselves:

What are the requirements that KDE has for an instant messaging / chat system 
for it to be viable as our main channel for real-time communication for the 
foreseeable future?

Here is what I could come up with, feel free to add new requirements or 
challenge the ones I'm listing.

Must-have:

- FOSS clients or at least API available for desktop as well as mobile
These clients must 
 - have a UI that someone who is < 20 years old and cares about the looks of a 
UI would use (or if those don't exist, we need to have people willing and able 
to write them before switching) 
 - run smoothly on computers that can run most other KDE software, without 
eating all of their memory

- FOSS server implementation
(this might look like a nice-to-have for some, but if we'd require everyone in 
KDE to use it, it's not optional)

- Ability to use without having to create a new account just for that.
We could force contributors to sign up for something, but we'd increase the 
barrier of entry if we'd make it mandatory for everyone who's just curious 
about what's happening in KDE.
Identity would suffice, as everyone who does anything with KDE has an Identity 
account anyway.

- Permanent logs across mobile and desktop clients without the need for users 
to set up anything.
That means ZNC does not count unless we implement it in a desktop as well as 
mobile client in a way that is completely friction-free for users

- Easy way to share files
A solution that puts files automatically on share.kde.org and embeds them from 
there works only if we have people willing and able to implement that feature 
into a desktop- as well as mobile client

- Support for a decent set of Emoji (not just the ones you can create using 
ASCII chars).
Using Unicode to display them is probably okay, as long as users can choose 
them from a menu in the client instead of having to paste them from 
KCharSelect.
This, too, might sound like nice-to-have for many, but not having them would 
cut us off from the younger generation. Yes, they use them even in a 
"professional context". Believe me, I'm seeing it in action every day at work.

- User avatars
Again, must-have if we want to reach the younger generation

- Uses a port that is open even on educational networks

- Channel listing
So that every public channel can be easily found


Nice-to-haves:

- Bridge to IRC
For the transitional period or for people who just refuse to change their 
habits

- Full name display
Makes things feel more trustworthy

- Integration with our development tools such as Phabricator

- Web client
Very handy if you are at a device which isn't yours and quickly want to check 
up on things

- Stickers
People love them when they have them, but they survive without them.

---
I'm sure I've forgot many things, but this (already quite long) list should 
give us a good start.

Looking forward to a productive discussion,
Thomas