Hi, We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change our discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly UI and very easy to use. Please give a view on my proposal.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 7:50 AM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change our discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly UI and very easy to use. Please give a view on my proposal.
It seems very unlikely that we would gain much by moving from an established open standard to a proprietary walled garden service.
Some of us have been using matrix.org, which is an open system with many of the features expected from a modern chat system. It also bridges to IRC, but usability and reliability of that bridging can still be improved. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:GWicke/Matrix.org for instructions.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 7:50 AM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change our discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly
UI
and very easy to use. Please give a view on my proposal.
It seems very unlikely that we would gain much by moving from an established open standard to a proprietary walled garden service.
-- 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
+1 for matrix.org. I use Riot https://riot.im/app and the Android app. The IRC bridge is still a bit flaky but it seems more reliable than a bouncer. If you do go the bouncer route, I recommend firrre https://firrre.com/.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Gabriel Wicke gwicke@wikimedia.org wrote:
Some of us have been using matrix.org, which is an open system with many of the features expected from a modern chat system. It also bridges to IRC, but usability and reliability of that bridging can still be improved. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:GWicke/Matrix.org for instructions.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch@wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 7:50 AM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change
our
discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly
UI
and very easy to use. Please give a view on my proposal.
It seems very unlikely that we would gain much by moving from an established open standard to a proprietary walled garden service.
-- 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
-- Gabriel Wicke Principal Engineer, Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Stephen Niedzielski < sniedzielski@wikimedia.org> wrote:
+1 for matrix.org. I use Riot https://riot.im/app and the Android app. The IRC bridge is still a bit flaky but it seems more reliable than a bouncer. If you do go the bouncer route, I recommend firrre https://firrre.com/.
Firrre signups are suspended (again), and they used to also require linking to an active github.
Hi,
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 18:20 +0530, MAYANK JINDAL wrote:
We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change our discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly UI and very easy to use.
Defining first which problems to solve would be good before dropping random names (as the next person might mention Slack, Matrix, <insert favorite tool and its color here>). "Easy to use" feels subjective...
Feel free to join https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T150732%C2%A0regarding Wikimedia sites, and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149661%C2%A0for MediaWiki related software, to help defining problems.
andre
Hi, The problem is in IRC that it doesn't allow to see previous messages. I mean it only shows messages as long as you are logged in.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:20 PM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, We are using IRC for discussion purpose. How will it be if we change our discussion platform? Many organizations have switched to gitter that have very user-friendly UI and very easy to use. Please give a view on my proposal.
-- Kind Regards, Mayank Jindal, Third year undergraduate student, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur Mobile : +91- 7076670299 <+91%2070766%2070299> || 8875432718
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 7:44 AM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, The problem is in IRC that it doesn't allow to see previous messages. I mean it only shows messages as long as you are logged in.
This isn't really a new problem. Some people use bouncers [1] to solve this. Other people just don't care about messages when they are not online (If someone really wants to talk to you asynchronously they can wait until you are back online, or leave a message on your talk page, or send you an email, or use MEMOSERV, etc). On most Wikimedia tech channels you can also find old messages at http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZNC
-- Brian
A lot of places are using Discord now, too. It has an offline, mobile, and web client that are more media based, so there's multiple channels and support for direct files/images uploads. I think it would make it a lot easier to actually have a chat platform you can interact with other people in. The problem being that Roles (how permissions works in discord) would show different users under that role under the active users list, so it would be a lot easier to mention various people important to mediawiki. Some developers may not like that, but from a community interaction standpoint, it'd be pretty cool.
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 6:50 AM, bawolff bawolff+wn@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 7:44 AM, MAYANK JINDAL mayank.jindal5@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, The problem is in IRC that it doesn't allow to see previous messages. I mean it only shows messages as long as you are logged in.
This isn't really a new problem. Some people use bouncers [1] to solve this. Other people just don't care about messages when they are not online (If someone really wants to talk to you asynchronously they can wait until you are back online, or leave a message on your talk page, or send you an email, or use MEMOSERV, etc). On most Wikimedia tech channels you can also find old messages at http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZNC
-- Brian
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
An issue was raised about only seeing IRC messages while logged in, however the WMF does publicly log several of their channels, so that is a moot point
Public logging isn't very accessible. When you join in a chat after being disconnected (like IRC does all the time), you'd like to look through the previous discussions easily.
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 4:30 PM, John phoenixoverride@gmail.com wrote:
An issue was raised about only seeing IRC messages while logged in, however the WMF does publicly log several of their channels, so that is a moot point _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Depends on how you define easy. http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23mediawiki/ is a recording of everything in #mediawiki by date, oldest at the top, newest at the bottom. I would consider that fairly easy.
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Cyken Zeraux cykenzeraux@gmail.com wrote:
Public logging isn't very accessible. When you join in a chat after being disconnected (like IRC does all the time), you'd like to look through the previous discussions easily.
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 4:30 PM, John phoenixoverride@gmail.com wrote:
An issue was raised about only seeing IRC messages while logged in,
however
the WMF does publicly log several of their channels, so that is a moot point _______________________________________________ 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
Hi!
Depends on how you define easy. http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23mediawiki/ is a recording of everything in #mediawiki by date, oldest at the top, newest at the bottom. I would consider that fairly easy.
It's easy if your use case is "reading everything on a particular day". If your use case is "locating that part where John and Mary talked about FooBar", it's not easy at all. Raw logs are as usable as... well, raw logs. People do read raw logs from time to time, but usually they employ tools to make sense of them - e.g. kibana, etc. Of course, it's a bit strained analogy, but my point is IRC raw logs are not a very good UI for many use cases. Don't have a good solution for this, as IRC is still excellent as transient quick discussion medium, but much less as a long-term persistent discussion one. OTOH, maybe that should be done with wiki+Flow?
Cyken Zeraux cykenzeraux@gmail.com wrote:
Public logging isn't very accessible. When you join in a chat after being disconnected (like IRC does all the time), you'd like to look through the previous discussions easily.
[…]
For ERC, I have the sniplet:
| (defun erc-cmd-TODAYSLOG nil | "Show today's log for current channel in a new buffer." | (let* | ((ch (erc-default-target)) | (todays-date (format-time-string "%Y%m%d")) | (url (concat "http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/" (url-hexify-string ch) "/" todays-date ".txt")) | (logbuffername (concat "*Today's log for " ch "*"))) | (url-retrieve url | (lambda (status logbuffername) | (let | ((url-buffer (current-buffer))) | (switch-to-buffer logbuffername) | (goto-char (point-min)) | (url-insert url-buffer) | (delete-region (point) (point-max)) | (goto-char (point-min)) | (insert (erc-controls-interpret (buffer-string))) | (delete-region (point) (point-max)) | (kill-buffer url-buffer))) | (list logbuffername))))
which makes "/todayslog" pop up a buffer with the log for the current channel and day (there is also "/yesterdayslog").
However, I consider IRC communications to be transient, much like conversations in an office. When one comes back from a break or holiday, one does not listen to recordings of all the chit-chat that happened since leaving. If something im- portant has been discussed, then it is the duty of those having discussed it to inform those who need to know in a condensed and comprehensive manner. If it was not impor- tant, well, then it was not important.
Tim
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org