6 ms·

That was impressively quick. Looking forward to Github/Gitlab repository rooms and activity integration. In the acquisition announcement they also mentioned t

That was impressively quick. Looking forward to Github/Gitlab repository rooms and activity integration. In the acquisition announcement they also mentioned threading though, which is the most important feature Element is missing for me. Without it I'm very hesitant to use it in a professional setting. I do hope that threads will look much more like Zulip rather than Slack (which is a mess), or offer different view modes. Zulips nested channel concept is a game changer. (as I understand it, the protocol already has the required plumbing)

ducktective 6y ago
Can you explain a bit more on "threading" and its relation to a chat service? And why Zulip's implementation is better?
- toyg 6y ago
  He’s talking of threads as in “email threads”, not “process threads” - i.e. indentation and grouping of messages and replies.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  Its when IM has a reply feature so you can "reply" to a message sent a little while ago and it quotes the message on the top of yours and usually you can click the message to scroll up to it. Essential for group chats and still useful for DMs.
benatkin 6y ago
A lot of people, including me, dislike threading in Slack. It breaks the algorithm for reading new messages. I use it when teammates do, and acknowledge it's useful sometimes, but I would prefer not to have that feature. Discord also does not have threads. I've heard some complaints about it, but not many. Threads in Zulip seem to change it into a different kind of app. I don't see how the Slack workspaces that I've used heavily would work with it. There are about 15 channels in my sidebar. Making them nested would turn it into 75, assuming 5 threads per channel. Perhaps there wouldn't need to be as many top-level channels with Zulip threads, but it makes it into a whole different paradigm. They are also missing Slack-style threads. I don't think it would be good to adopt it.
- Xylakant 6y ago
  Zulip threads (topics) are fundamentally different from slack threads. TL;DR Slack threads are an after-thought add-on, Zulips topics are a first-class citizen. Slacks threads can branch of at any point from any message in a channel - if you miss the start of the thread message, it disappears unless someone cross-posts to the channel or mentions you. This is by far the biggest problem I have with slack threads. Zulip organizes into streams and topics, streams being roughly equivalent to channels and topics similar to threads. However, unlike slack, every message must live in a topic. Topics that have seen a message lately bubble to the top, topics that don't see activity fall to the bottom. You can still see the full stream in chronological order, but messages are grouped by and visibly marked with the topic they belong to. This makes it much easier to both follow a stream and still mentally follow multiple conversations in the same stream.
- ttsda 6y ago
  I think threads, used sparingly, are nice. They're good to have semi-private messages, so you can keep the more irrelevant conversation that would normally go to PM public and searchable, while not spamming the channel. They're also good for support channels, to have a thread per support message.
- eXpl0it3r 6y ago
  I like threads a lot in the way we use it. With 60+ people in one channel, being able to ask a question and get answers in the thread, while not spamming the channel with replies and potentially interweaving multiple question & answer "threads" is really useful.
  - climb_stealth 6y ago
    Threads in Slack are useful but the implementation is pretty bad. For example you don't see new responses in a visible thread until you click the button for more messages. It makes them really frustrating to use. Slack does a lot of things really well which makes the pain of using threads even worse.
    - 6y ago
Arathorn 6y ago
Matrix now has two flavours of threading defined and implemented as we experiment with the different approaches: label-based threading in MSC2326[1] (i.e. "filter this room to only show msgs tagged #foo"), and full-blown free-form HN/Reddit/NNTP/SMTP/Twitter style threading in MSC2836[2]. The former is closer to Zulip, and is implemented in Synapse. The latter is closer to HN, and is implemented in Dendrite[3][4]. Clientwise, Element supports neither so far, but we're experimenting with the HN-style threading in a dedicated playground called Cerulean[5]. The idea is to get it working well there, and then figure out how to merge it most effectively into Element. So: it's not ready yet, but it's getting tantalisingly close. We'll probably start hosting a demo version of Cerulean next week so folks can play along and see how it feels :) [1] https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/matthew/msc2326/proposals/2326-label-based-filtering.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/matthew/msc232... [2] https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/kegan/msc/threading/proposals/2836-threading.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/kegan/msc/thre... [3] https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1589 https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1589 [4] https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1596 https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1596 [5] https://github.com/matrix-org/cerulean https://github.com/matrix-org/cerulean
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  So...could I write a gateway that provides functionality for threads to be pulled in from HN/Reddit/NNTP/SMTP/Twitter (MSC2836)? Think Epiverse [1] within Matrix and its clients. [1] https://epiverse.co/ https://epiverse.co/
  - Arathorn 6y ago
    Yup. Can't wait for someone to implement a Matrix-powered Disqus clone!
    - vlmutolo 6y ago
      Wow, it would be really, really interesting for a blog to offer a Matrix room as a "comment section". If you didn't care about threading, you could probably do something like that even today.
rkangel 6y ago
I actually think that the MS Teams implementation of threads is the best. The problem with the Slack implementation is that it's not the default. You have to understand it to use it, and you have to have an organisational culture that pushes people to use it. Otherwise you end up only occasional threads, and mostly you're back in in the classic Slack '200 messages since you last visited, only 10 of them are of interest, but you have to read everything to find them' situation. I like the Zulip version, it is automatically threaded but personally I had a slightly silly problem - you had to think of a topic name. It's a bit like the subject line of an email, except that you don't want it to be as long. This increases the friction slightly and you inevitably end up with a lot of messages going in one topic called something like 'general' when people can't think of a suitable topic name. I haven't used Zulip as intensively as the other two though, so maybe that problem goes away (or maybe it gets worse). Teams is a lot like Zulip. Everything is in a thread automatically, but you don't have to name it, you just start a new 'conversation'. It works pretty organically, and it works by default without any 'culture' needed. You can give a thread a title if you want, but you don't have to. A bonus of the structure of Teams is that private messages (as supposed to Team channels) are just are a normal sequence of messages like Slack or anything else, because that's what you want. Teams is a memory hog and sluggish to use, but I do think they got that bit of the user experience right. Like many companies we had enforced, hurried massive increase in usage of Teams in March, and it has worked pretty seamlessly.
- unicornporn 6y ago
  Threads in Teams? I use it daily and have not noticed that feature. How? In the desktop client I can't even properly quote.
  - rkangel 6y ago
    In a normal Team channel (i.e. not a chat message) when you press 'New conversation' you type a message and then people reply to that. That is a thread. The fact that you didn't even think of it as one I take an indication how seamless it is.
StavrosK 6y ago
I'll second Zulip, though I think the message view and "zooming in/out" they implemented is just as much of a game changer as the threading model.

ducktective 6y ago

Can you explain a bit more on "threading" and its relation to a chat service? And why Zulip's implementation is better?

toyg 6y ago
He’s talking of threads as in “email threads”, not “process threads” - i.e. indentation and grouping of messages and replies.
SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
Its when IM has a reply feature so you can "reply" to a message sent a little while ago and it quotes the message on the top of yours and usually you can click the message to scroll up to it. Essential for group chats and still useful for DMs.

benatkin 6y ago

A lot of people, including me, dislike threading in Slack. It breaks the algorithm for reading new messages. I use it when teammates do, and acknowledge it's useful sometimes, but I would prefer not to have that feature. Discord also does not have threads. I've heard some complaints about it, but not many. Threads in Zulip seem to change it into a different kind of app. I don't see how the Slack workspaces that I've used heavily would work with it. There are about 15 channels in my sidebar. Making them nested would turn it into 75, assuming 5 threads per channel. Perhaps there wouldn't need to be as many top-level channels with Zulip threads, but it makes it into a whole different paradigm. They are also missing Slack-style threads. I don't think it would be good to adopt it.

Xylakant 6y ago
Zulip threads (topics) are fundamentally different from slack threads. TL;DR Slack threads are an after-thought add-on, Zulips topics are a first-class citizen. Slacks threads can branch of at any point from any message in a channel - if you miss the start of the thread message, it disappears unless someone cross-posts to the channel or mentions you. This is by far the biggest problem I have with slack threads. Zulip organizes into streams and topics, streams being roughly equivalent to channels and topics similar to threads. However, unlike slack, every message must live in a topic. Topics that have seen a message lately bubble to the top, topics that don't see activity fall to the bottom. You can still see the full stream in chronological order, but messages are grouped by and visibly marked with the topic they belong to. This makes it much easier to both follow a stream and still mentally follow multiple conversations in the same stream.
ttsda 6y ago
I think threads, used sparingly, are nice. They're good to have semi-private messages, so you can keep the more irrelevant conversation that would normally go to PM public and searchable, while not spamming the channel. They're also good for support channels, to have a thread per support message.
eXpl0it3r 6y ago
I like threads a lot in the way we use it. With 60+ people in one channel, being able to ask a question and get answers in the thread, while not spamming the channel with replies and potentially interweaving multiple question & answer "threads" is really useful.
- climb_stealth 6y ago
  Threads in Slack are useful but the implementation is pretty bad. For example you don't see new responses in a visible thread until you click the button for more messages. It makes them really frustrating to use. Slack does a lot of things really well which makes the pain of using threads even worse.
  - 6y ago

Arathorn 6y ago

Matrix now has two flavours of threading defined and implemented as we experiment with the different approaches: label-based threading in MSC2326[1] (i.e. "filter this room to only show msgs tagged #foo"), and full-blown free-form HN/Reddit/NNTP/SMTP/Twitter style threading in MSC2836[2]. The former is closer to Zulip, and is implemented in Synapse. The latter is closer to HN, and is implemented in Dendrite[3][4]. Clientwise, Element supports neither so far, but we're experimenting with the HN-style threading in a dedicated playground called Cerulean[5]. The idea is to get it working well there, and then figure out how to merge it most effectively into Element. So: it's not ready yet, but it's getting tantalisingly close. We'll probably start hosting a demo version of Cerulean next week so folks can play along and see how it feels :) [1] https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/matthew/msc2326/proposals/2326-label-based-filtering.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/matthew/msc232... [2] https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/kegan/msc/threading/proposals/2836-threading.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/kegan/msc/thre... [3] https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1589 https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1589 [4] https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1596 https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pull/1596 [5] https://github.com/matrix-org/cerulean https://github.com/matrix-org/cerulean

toomuchtodo 6y ago
So...could I write a gateway that provides functionality for threads to be pulled in from HN/Reddit/NNTP/SMTP/Twitter (MSC2836)? Think Epiverse [1] within Matrix and its clients. [1] https://epiverse.co/ https://epiverse.co/
- Arathorn 6y ago
  Yup. Can't wait for someone to implement a Matrix-powered Disqus clone!
  - vlmutolo 6y ago
    Wow, it would be really, really interesting for a blog to offer a Matrix room as a "comment section". If you didn't care about threading, you could probably do something like that even today.

rkangel 6y ago

I actually think that the MS Teams implementation of threads is the best. The problem with the Slack implementation is that it's not the default. You have to understand it to use it, and you have to have an organisational culture that pushes people to use it. Otherwise you end up only occasional threads, and mostly you're back in in the classic Slack '200 messages since you last visited, only 10 of them are of interest, but you have to read everything to find them' situation. I like the Zulip version, it is automatically threaded but personally I had a slightly silly problem - you had to think of a topic name. It's a bit like the subject line of an email, except that you don't want it to be as long. This increases the friction slightly and you inevitably end up with a lot of messages going in one topic called something like 'general' when people can't think of a suitable topic name. I haven't used Zulip as intensively as the other two though, so maybe that problem goes away (or maybe it gets worse). Teams is a lot like Zulip. Everything is in a thread automatically, but you don't have to name it, you just start a new 'conversation'. It works pretty organically, and it works by default without any 'culture' needed. You can give a thread a title if you want, but you don't have to. A bonus of the structure of Teams is that private messages (as supposed to Team channels) are just are a normal sequence of messages like Slack or anything else, because that's what you want. Teams is a memory hog and sluggish to use, but I do think they got that bit of the user experience right. Like many companies we had enforced, hurried massive increase in usage of Teams in March, and it has worked pretty seamlessly.

unicornporn 6y ago
Threads in Teams? I use it daily and have not noticed that feature. How? In the desktop client I can't even properly quote.
- rkangel 6y ago
  In a normal Team channel (i.e. not a chat message) when you press 'New conversation' you type a message and then people reply to that. That is a thread. The fact that you didn't even think of it as one I take an indication how seamless it is.

StavrosK 6y ago

I'll second Zulip, though I think the message view and "zooming in/out" they implemented is just as much of a game changer as the threading model.