3 ms·

This is a fastly growing messaging startup we're talking about. You may be right, but to me it sounds highly unlikely they haven't had to make even the slighest

• hnlmorg 6y ago
  Given most of the complaints about signal are UI/UX, it wouldn’t surprise me if most of that time has been spent client side (and that’s naturally going to have the larger code base too). Plus many of the backend stability problems might just have been solved by “let’s throw another server in” (not a philosophy I 100% support but given dev resource is finite and people usually judge software by the client side experience, I couldn’t blame Signal if that’s how they’ve been operating). Also let’s not forget that Signal was founded 6 years ago so they’ve already had some time to work on their backend code already (and in a sector that isn’t exactly lacking of research papers and prior art for solutions).
• grlass 6y ago
  Take your point, though given it's all E2E, the server logic doesn't need to be that complicated, or changed with new features, since every new feature can be implemented as a message. Server just needs message queues and routing? I'm aware they're looking at backup features and such, wondering if they'd be part of the server, or a different system. I'd expect some improvements to performance and such, esp. as they grow, so good catch on the 10 month wait, but it's an orange flag rather than red flag to me.