Hi,
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:36 PM, David Strine dstrine@wikimedia.org wrote:
We will be holding this brownbag in 25 minutes. The Bluejeans link has changed:
I'm not familiar with bluejeans and maybe have missed a transition because I wasn't paying enough attention. is this some kind of experiment? have all meetings transitioned to this service?
anyway, my immediate question at the moment is how do you join without sharing your microphone and camera?
am I correct thinking that this is an entirely proprietary stack that's neither gratis nor libre and has no on-premise (not cloud) hosting option? are we paying for this?
-Jeremy
The right question here is: is it more important for Wikimedia foundation to use only open source than it is to focus on work that directly benefits the movement? There's no reasonable open source to do this function. The ones that exist are terrible, are less efficient, and have to have hardware dedicated to them. In either case it's going to cost money to handle this, the question is, should it also cost engineering time?
Idealism comes at a pretty high cost. The foundation in the past has made a pretty reasonable choice in the past in that they're willing to use proprietary software for functions that aren't directly associated with the projects. The decision is often focused on "if the community wanted to fork the projects, would this proprietary software we're using be a problem?". In this case the answer would be no.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:36 PM, David Strine dstrine@wikimedia.org wrote:
We will be holding this brownbag in 25 minutes. The Bluejeans link has changed:
I'm not familiar with bluejeans and maybe have missed a transition because I wasn't paying enough attention. is this some kind of experiment? have all meetings transitioned to this service?
anyway, my immediate question at the moment is how do you join without sharing your microphone and camera?
am I correct thinking that this is an entirely proprietary stack that's neither gratis nor libre and has no on-premise (not cloud) hosting option? are we paying for this?
-Jeremy
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
The right question here is: is it more important for Wikimedia foundation to use only open source than it is to focus on work that directly benefits the movement? There's no reasonable open source to do this function. The ones that exist are terrible, are less efficient, and have to have hardware dedicated to them. In either case it's going to cost money to handle this, the question is, should it also cost engineering time?
Idealism comes at a pretty high cost. The foundation in the past has made a pretty reasonable choice in the past in that they're willing to use proprietary software for functions that aren't directly associated with the projects. The decision is often focused on "if the community wanted to fork the projects, would this proprietary software we're using be a problem?". In this case the answer would be no.
the old default (AFAIK) was Google Hangouts. which I guess is just as closed source but maybe is less cost? note that I'm not saying that sub-optimal cost or source availability or hosting options are necessarily a reason to not use bluejeans. but I would at least like to be aware of the answers to those questions.
OTOH, IMO, the (apparent) inability to use this service with stock Chrome (on a chromebook, stable channel) without sharing my webcam/microphone is a blocker. (which maybe we can get them to fix)
I suppose the service may work ok with a Chrome instance that itself doesn't have access to the webcam/microphone hardware. But that's not good enough. again, IMO.
-Jeremy
Jeremy, uncheck the microphone and camera buttons after selecting 'computer' and before selecting 'join'.
-- brion
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
The right question here is: is it more important for Wikimedia foundation to use only open source than it is to focus on work that directly
benefits
the movement? There's no reasonable open source to do this function. The ones that exist are terrible, are less efficient, and have to have
hardware
dedicated to them. In either case it's going to cost money to handle
this,
the question is, should it also cost engineering time?
Idealism comes at a pretty high cost. The foundation in the past has
made a
pretty reasonable choice in the past in that they're willing to use proprietary software for functions that aren't directly associated with
the
projects. The decision is often focused on "if the community wanted to
fork
the projects, would this proprietary software we're using be a problem?". In this case the answer would be no.
the old default (AFAIK) was Google Hangouts. which I guess is just as closed source but maybe is less cost? note that I'm not saying that sub-optimal cost or source availability or hosting options are necessarily a reason to not use bluejeans. but I would at least like to be aware of the answers to those questions.
OTOH, IMO, the (apparent) inability to use this service with stock Chrome (on a chromebook, stable channel) without sharing my webcam/microphone is a blocker. (which maybe we can get them to fix)
I suppose the service may work ok with a Chrome instance that itself doesn't have access to the webcam/microphone hardware. But that's not good enough. again, IMO.
-Jeremy
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
Jeremy, uncheck the microphone and camera buttons after selecting 'computer' and before selecting 'join'.
right, I saw those.
the problem is that if you have Chrome set to disallow websites from using your Mic/Camera then you can't get that far. it just gets stuck at requiring you to allow access.
-Jeremy
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
Jeremy, uncheck the microphone and camera buttons after selecting 'computer' and before selecting 'join'.
right, I saw those.
the problem is that if you have Chrome set to disallow websites from using your Mic/Camera then you can't get that far. it just gets stuck at requiring you to allow access.
Heh.... ok that would be something to report upstream yes. :)
Not relevant to a lot of folks doing straightforward video conferencing so that's probably why it's not already working, but probably relevant to our usage for presentations with large audiences. (When there's a YouTube live stream that's at least watchable on most browsers, but then you can't participate in the direct chat.)
-- brion
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
Jeremy, uncheck the microphone and camera buttons after selecting 'computer' and before selecting 'join'.
right, I saw those.
the problem is that if you have Chrome set to disallow websites from using your Mic/Camera then you can't get that far. it just gets stuck at requiring you to allow access.
(to clarify, I was using the service as a guest, I don't have an account.)
I'm happy to help with more STR if needed.
Heh.... ok that would be something to report upstream yes. :)
:)
so, do I open my own support ticket? I guess I'll wait a bit to see if someone knows whether or not we have a relationship with them and they want to file for me? (best guess would be OIT?)
Not relevant to a lot of folks doing straightforward video conferencing so that's probably why it's not already working,
sure, I don't know much about them, I just heard of the service for the first time today. I think.
but probably relevant to our usage for presentations with large audiences.
yeah, that was my point.
we have audiences that have more than average concerns about privacy. but also * we shouldn't make it hard for people to enforce least privilege (and we shouldn't be getting people into the habit of clicking allow unnecessarily): don't allow access to camera if you're not going to use the camera. and * some people may want to watch a presentation in their pajamas, etc. :)
(When there's a YouTube live stream that's at least watchable on most browsers, but then you can't participate in the direct chat.)
yeah.
actually, if we do have a relationship with them then I wonder if this is available for others to use too? I know some other Wikimedia meetings where this was an issue. at first glance, doesn't look like they publish prices or offer a free tier; they say that the free trial lasts 14 days.
I did some searching and found projects related to bluejeans and they offer various auxiliary software packages (e.g. browser plugins and the relay) for download directly from the bluejeans site. but no sign of source or license (or even statement that they are proprietary). maybe someone else lurking has the answer?
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
Unfortunately, if you choose computer and aren't using Chrome,[1] you have to install a browser plugin that people I trust say is not secure.
[1]: Some people have said that it also works with Chromium installed from Ubuntu, but last time I tried it only pretends to work[2] for Chromium installed from Debian. [2]: "Pretends to work" meaning it looks like it joined but you don't actually get any audio or video.
ugh, another maybe blocker.
(I was using Google branded Chrome so didn't run into any of that yet)
-Jeremy
BlueJeans is "open source" though I can't offhand find their source code by googling for "bluejeans source". ;)
It's being used mostly for larger meetings because a) it has a larger limit for number of participants than Google Hangout and b) it seems to be more open than Google Hangout.
When you join you're prompted to either use your computer or use a phone connection; if you choose computer, you then are given the chance to enable or disable the camera and mic before the connection actually starts.
Can't answer on if anybody's paying anything as I don't know, but personally I would hope we are helping to fund their open source development. ;)
-- brion
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:36 PM, David Strine dstrine@wikimedia.org wrote:
We will be holding this brownbag in 25 minutes. The Bluejeans link has changed:
I'm not familiar with bluejeans and maybe have missed a transition because I wasn't paying enough attention. is this some kind of experiment? have all meetings transitioned to this service?
anyway, my immediate question at the moment is how do you join without sharing your microphone and camera?
am I correct thinking that this is an entirely proprietary stack that's neither gratis nor libre and has no on-premise (not cloud) hosting option? are we paying for this?
-Jeremy
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
When you join you're prompted to either use your computer or use a phone connection; if you choose computer, you then are given the chance to enable or disable the camera and mic before the connection actually starts.
Unfortunately, if you choose computer and aren't using Chrome,[1] you have to install a browser plugin that people I trust say is not secure.
[1]: Some people have said that it also works with Chromium installed from Ubuntu, but last time I tried it only pretends to work[2] for Chromium installed from Debian. [2]: "Pretends to work" meaning it looks like it joined but you don't actually get any audio or video.
2016-03-01 23:55 GMT+02:00 Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
When you join you're prompted to either use your computer or use a phone connection; if you choose computer, you then are given the chance to enable or disable the camera and mic before the connection actually starts.
Unfortunately, if you choose computer and aren't using Chrome,[1] you have to install a browser plugin that people I trust say is not secure.
Secure or not, why do I have to download and extract an archive, instead of using the browser's addon system? I don't know about price or freedom (can't find the source code either) but as far as ease of use is concerned, it lags way behind Hangouts.
[1]: Some people have said that it also works with Chromium installed from Ubuntu, but last time I tried it only pretends to work[2] for Chromium installed from Debian.
Yeah, no luck on opensuse either.
Strainu
[2]: "Pretends to work" meaning it looks like it joined but you don't actually get any audio or video.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Yep, all Linux-compatible large-group video conferencing options known are known to be bad in different ways.
-- brion
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2016-03-01 23:55 GMT+02:00 Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org
wrote:
When you join you're prompted to either use your computer or use a phone connection; if you choose computer, you then are given the chance to
enable
or disable the camera and mic before the connection actually starts.
Unfortunately, if you choose computer and aren't using Chrome,[1] you
have
to install a browser plugin that people I trust say is not secure.
Secure or not, why do I have to download and extract an archive, instead of using the browser's addon system? I don't know about price or freedom (can't find the source code either) but as far as ease of use is concerned, it lags way behind Hangouts.
[1]: Some people have said that it also works with Chromium installed
from
Ubuntu, but last time I tried it only pretends to work[2] for Chromium installed from Debian.
Yeah, no luck on opensuse either.
Strainu
[2]: "Pretends to work" meaning it looks like it joined but you don't actually get any audio or video.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I recommend you to try open source Canvas LMS which is replacing other open source platforms: https://enterexe.com/open-source-canvas-lms-software-implementation
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
BlueJeans is "open source" though I can't offhand find their source code by googling for "bluejeans source". ;)
I've dug around a bit, and also cant find anything to suggest that they are open sourcing any parts of their solution, or anything resembling bjn providing development or support for existing open source technology components.
Their own java classes are using namespace "vc.bjn", and googing that doesnt lead to anything.
Here is their recent github organisation:
https://github.com/BlueJeansNetwork
This looks like an older one:
https://github.com/bluejeansnet
And here is the only use of "vc.bjn" in github, by an employee
https://github.com/Aldaviva/tailor
Other employees have "operations"-like repos
If the organisation is a credible contributor to open source, I havent found it yet. I hope that WMF included "open sourciness" in their product selection criteria & evaluation, so their should be some document describing how BJN is contributing to open source. It would be great if that can be shared.
It's being used mostly for larger meetings because a) it has a larger limit for number of participants than Google Hangout and b) it seems to be more open than Google Hangout. ... Can't answer on if anybody's paying anything as I don't know, but personally I would hope we are helping to fund their open source development. ;)
If BNJ isnt actually open source, here is an open source solution that we could use and help fund as required (e.g. buying their commercial offerings so that WMF Engineering/Ops doesnt need to support it)
-- John Vandenberg
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:00 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
BlueJeans is "open source" though I can't offhand find their source code
by
googling for "bluejeans source". ;)
I've dug around a bit, and also cant find anything to suggest that they are open sourcing any parts of their solution, or anything resembling bjn providing development or support for existing open source technology components.
Their own java classes are using namespace "vc.bjn", and googing that doesnt lead to anything.
Here is their recent github organisation:
https://github.com/BlueJeansNetwork
This looks like an older one:
https://github.com/bluejeansnet
And here is the only use of "vc.bjn" in github, by an employee
https://github.com/Aldaviva/tailor
Other employees have "operations"-like repos
If the organisation is a credible contributor to open source, I havent found it yet. I hope that WMF included "open sourciness" in their product selection criteria & evaluation, so their should be some document describing how BJN is contributing to open source. It would be great if that can be shared.
It's being used mostly for larger meetings because a) it has a larger
limit
for number of participants than Google Hangout and b) it seems to be more open than Google Hangout. ... Can't answer on if anybody's paying anything as I don't know, but personally I would hope we are helping to fund their open source development. ;)
If BNJ isnt actually open source, here is an open source solution that we could use and help fund as required (e.g. buying their commercial offerings so that WMF Engineering/Ops doesnt need to support it)
From the FAQ: If you have a session with 20 users and all share their
webcam (yes, this is possible) will generate 400 streams
Pretty much sounds like a deal breaker to me. The primary use case of bluejeans is for meetings where we need a hundred people in the same channel. The difference with bluejeans is it manages the streams on the backend and sends just one video stream to each user (afaik).
-- John Vandenberg
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Erik Bernhardson ebernhardson@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:00 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
If BNJ isnt actually open source, here is an open source solution that we could use and help fund as required (e.g. buying their commercial offerings so that WMF Engineering/Ops doesnt need to support it)
From the FAQ: If you have a session with 20 users and all share their
webcam (yes, this is possible) will generate 400 streams
Do you mean 20 concurrent screen sharing is a requirement for any replacement of Blue Jeans? That sounds like an usual meeting ;-) Anyway, in 2010, they had that configuration: http://bigbluebutton.org/2010/11/22/193-simultaneous-users/
My guess is that it is better in 2016. Anyway, best we ask them, if we can give them a list of requirements and a budget.
http://blindsidenetworks.com/hosting
Hi!
If BNJ isnt actually open source, here is an open source solution that we could use and help fund as required (e.g. buying their commercial offerings so that WMF Engineering/Ops doesnt need to support it)
I've checked their demo and it uses Flash. Which is very iffy from security standpoint, may lead to various issues on platforms that don't support it or where support is sketchy and is not a good idea in general long-term since Flash is on its way out as a technology.
While I'm all for supporting open-source, both by using it and contributing to it, in this particular case it doesn't look like viable solution to me.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi!
If BNJ isnt actually open source, here is an open source solution that we could use and help fund as required (e.g. buying their commercial offerings so that WMF Engineering/Ops doesnt need to support it)
I've checked their demo and it uses Flash. Which is very iffy from security standpoint, may lead to various issues on platforms that don't support it or where support is sketchy and is not a good idea in general long-term since Flash is on its way out as a technology.
While I'm all for supporting open-source, both by using it and contributing to it, in this particular case it doesn't look like viable solution to me.
The demo has a html5 client, and the demo asks me whether I want to use Flash or HTML5.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org