Re: Highlights from the TSC meeting during ELCE

Marti Bolivar <marti@...>


I'd like to discuss some counterpoints.

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 6:38 PM Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@...> wrote:
"Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@...> writes:

> Thanks for the summary, Anas
>>> 4.       We are considering a new communication platform to replace IRC. Candidates are Slack and gitter. This has not been decided yet, if you have any feedback, please let us know.
> I'd like to ask what is the rationale behind IRC replacement, what is trying to be solved?
> IRC is:
> - easy to access for everyone from every platform

In all honesty I think

s/platform/Linux distribution/

And I agree.

IRC is not "easy" across platforms in a modern sense of the word, unless you use irccloud (which, full disclosure, I do, after changing from ERC within emacs by way of various other clients starting with Ircle on pre-OS X Macs back in the day).

Note irccloud is not free software.

> - well integrated into everyone's favourite messaging client


I think this statement also has some Linux bias. Zephyr is a Linux foundation project, but it's also important to be able to develop using Zephyr and collaborate with other users on all supported platforms, and convenience and familiarity do have some practical weight here.

IRC clients that look good on a modern desktop (again, other than irccloud) are lacking. (Yup, that's an opinion.) Mobile support without irccloud is also lacking. 

And it's not like irccloud is exactly a household name.

Taking "everyone" by raw numbers, we'd be looking for WhatsApp,  WeChat, etc. integration, and I don't think their clients can be called "well" integrated with IRC.

So the above statement seems suspect to me. 

That said, preferring open and battle-tested standards is usually a good idea in an open source project, at least so long as they get the job done well enough.

> - does not depend on a single corporation (looking at you, Slack)

Slack is a proprietary de facto standard in this context, at least in the west. IRC is a venerable and interoperable open standard with usability issues and mindshare problems depending on who you're talking to. That seems to be the real crux of the matter here.

There's good arguments on either side of this debate, but I think we ought to be honest with ourselves that this is really what we are arguing about.

yeah, easy to script, clients are lightweight, ...

Full of spam (and, let's be frank, some of that spam is hate speech), it's 2018 and slack is lightweight enough for all the laptops we tend to use, lacks native support for anything that isn't plain text, ...

Without a good reason
I'm totally in favor of keep using IRC.

I hope the above is some fodder for discussion on why this is not a no-brainer decision.



Flavio Ceolin

Join to automatically receive all group messages.