3 ms·

I don't think anything you wrote contradicts what I said in the parent comment. In the section you quoted, I only meant to say that other homeserver projects ar

I don't think anything you wrote contradicts what I said in the parent comment. In the section you quoted, I only meant to say that other homeserver projects are definitely not dead. There are a bunch that are actively developed and improving. It's also true that the new homeservers aren't yet ready for prime time. But they're coming along really fast. It's true that homeservers by third parties had a bit of a rough time in the beginning due to finding "bugs" in the spec that no one noticed before because there had previously only been a single homeserver implementation. That situation has been improving though. I've seen Conduit development result in several different patches submitted to the upstream Matrix spec.

AshamedCaptain 5y ago
> It's also true that the new homeservers aren't yet ready for prime time. But they're coming along really fast. I have seen way too many being abandoned to believe that. In fact last time I researched I put Conduit in the abandoned list, though apparently I was wrong. Matrix is just a too complex protocol, and way too focused on one and only one server implementation. Which is ironic considering probably every other competitor protocol (save for perhaps IRC itself) is even more complex, but at least they were not that complex when they initially showed up -- so other people could actually start implementations that survived and growed along.
- vlmutolo 5y ago
  I asked the primary author from conduit, as a third party implementating a server, if he thought the protocol was too complex. He said no, which actually surprised me. I'm somewhat of an layperson on this topic in that I haven't actually ever tried to work with the protocol on a low level. But my take on it is that if they can slow down the pace of Matrix evolution in the next couple years, the protocol will be in a good state. It's complex, but it's providing extremely complex features. But if they keep going at this pace for too long, third party implementations may become less feasible.

AshamedCaptain 5y ago

> It's also true that the new homeservers aren't yet ready for prime time. But they're coming along really fast. I have seen way too many being abandoned to believe that. In fact last time I researched I put Conduit in the abandoned list, though apparently I was wrong. Matrix is just a too complex protocol, and way too focused on one and only one server implementation. Which is ironic considering probably every other competitor protocol (save for perhaps IRC itself) is even more complex, but at least they were not that complex when they initially showed up -- so other people could actually start implementations that survived and growed along.

vlmutolo 5y ago
I asked the primary author from conduit, as a third party implementating a server, if he thought the protocol was too complex. He said no, which actually surprised me. I'm somewhat of an layperson on this topic in that I haven't actually ever tried to work with the protocol on a low level. But my take on it is that if they can slow down the pace of Matrix evolution in the next couple years, the protocol will be in a good state. It's complex, but it's providing extremely complex features. But if they keep going at this pace for too long, third party implementations may become less feasible.