what’s really federation on a system that isolates conversations per server? can you reply to a message from one server on another? maybe the main thing would be single account, because even friend lists from multiple accounts could be merged
Comment on Revolt became Stoat
renegadespork@lemmy.jelliefrontier.net 2 days ago
This seems like a cool project. I especially love the UI’s similarity to Discord, but it still has a long road ahead to be a viable chat platform IMO.
I’ve been periodically checking in with Revolt Stoat for about a year now, and personally, the two things that I’m waiting for are:
- Voice chat - It seems like this is coming, but they had to clean up a bunch or tech debt first
- Federation - Self-hosted chat is great, but not being able to talk to other servers is incredibly limiting for a social tool. AFAIK they’re not planning on implementing this. This is likely a deal-breaker for a lot of folks.
I’m currently running Matrix synapse, and while matrix is kinda a messy ecosystem, it’s really hard to compete with its maturity and adoption in the FOSS / Self-Hosted space.
Also, not super important, but this blog post reads like it’s AI generated.
fixmycode@feddit.cl 1 day ago
renegadespork@lemmy.jelliefrontier.net 1 day ago
what’s really federation on a system that isolates conversations per server?
That’s like asking why Lemmy needs federation if posts are tied to a Community.
No federation means:
- Every server requires a different user account to join a room
- Every server needs to be accessed from a different URL
- Users in different servers cannot direct message, call, or friendlist one another
Federated platforms aren’t perfect, but they solve these problems.
themagzuz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
i honestly think that if revolt had federation, then it would be the obvious choice for me, but alas. personally i’m still hopeful for polyproto getting off the ground, but the boring realistic choice for the time being is probably something like XMPP + mumble
aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 23 hours ago
It looks like polyproto doesn’t have any intent to implement voice chat or screen sharing?
themagzuz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 hours ago
i think for my purposes i’m fine with hosting that through a separate service, so instead of XMPP + mumble i would run polyproto + mumble (or some other voip solution, screen sharing seems to be a decent way away in mumble)
but (as i understand it), polyproto isn’t a chat protocol per se, but more a protocol for federated message authentication. as an application of this protocol, they’re building polyproto-chat, which is a chat protocol. in theory, one could then also build a polyproto-voice so you can use the same account for both chatting and voice calls. i still think this is pretty far away, considering how young polyproto is, which is why my current vision is chat and voice as two separate services (which i also prefer because i imagine it makes the technology simpler and hosting easier)
renegadespork@lemmy.jelliefrontier.net 2 days ago
I’m getting an HTTP 522 from that link. What’s Polyproto?
Also, is there a reason you’re not considering Matrix?
themagzuz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
oh yea their website seems to be down. surely a good sign… in the meantime, you can look at the website/spec through their codeberg repos.
i’m not a huge fan of matrix because it seems very bad to selfhost. from my understanding, if anyone using your homeserver joins a big channel, your homeserver will have to store the entire history of that channel and keep it up to date. on top of that, it very much seems like the spec isn’t being developed by the community, but more that element implements some feature and then forces that into the spec. also polyproto claims to be much more resilient, allowing you to migrate to a new homeserver, even if your old one is already dead.
also a lot of matrix’s funding comes from crypto, ai and venture capital, so i think it’s just a matter of time before the whole project becomes completely subsumed by capital interests