It is actually not hard to extend the software. I, for example, set up automatic uploading of cal recordings to a Peertube instance.
It is actually not hard to extend the software. I, for example, set up automatic uploading of cal recordings to a Peertube instance.
flyos@jlai.lu 1 month ago
I guess. There must be a reason for them turning to something else than Jitsi given they already had that running (and the French service responsible for that, DINUM, is surprisingly extremely open-source friendly for a state service), but I don’t know which one.
derpgon@programming.dev 1 month ago
It is always either that the license is not permissive enough, too many changes are required that upstream wouldn’t merge and its would be hard to keep rebased, showing the world that they can be absolutely independent, or not having enough experience and experts for given stack. Maybe I missed some reasons, but that’d be all I think of.
Either way, if it’s open sourced our company might switch.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
You may be new to modern software development. Switching proverbial horses is massively common, usually for no benefit (or to lock people in). It’s everywhere, and especially in the corps who want that lock-in (ohai apple).
For a 2 week overlap, people on gtalk, Facebook and a regular jabber server could chat with one another as easy as addressing an email message. Then both Facebook and Google switched to their own homebrew replacement and made up some compelling-sounding, feature-laden but implausible reason. Gtalk has never sucked less than those two weeks with a working discreet client app and interoperability, though. It was actually adequate.