4 ms·

Well, matrix does a lot of things different. A rewrite seems pretty unavoidable with hat many and significant changes

southerntofu 5y ago
What's so different about it? Historically XMPP was more geared towards message-passing without server-side archival, but that ship has long since sailed to support multi-client. As it is, i don't see any significant change except for the consensus algorithm for decentralized rooms which could very well be an extension to the XMPP s2s protocol.
- pkulak 5y ago
  https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-the-difference-between-matrix-and-xmpp%3F https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-the-difference-between-matri...
  - southerntofu 5y ago
    Yes i understand that Matrix is a consensus-assembled JSON database. For the sake of argument, this could have been developed as an XMPP extension. In real life, you don't need or want a distributed consensus for simpler federated chat: it's been the cause of so many troubles across the Matrix ecosystem (room version incompatibilities, room takeovers due to netsplit, bad performance) that it's actually an argument against that building block. Except of course for censorship-resilient public rooms where it shines, which goes back to my point that "decentralized rooms" as an XMPP extension would have made sense.
    - kitkat_new 5y ago
      room versions are incompatible naturally and room takeovers were a bug. So saying it's the cause for these things, is misleading. At this time there are 9 room versions. Once the room version had to be incremented because of a bug in the consensus algorithm, which required a new algorithm, i.e. room version. That's it. Bugs happen when you create new tech... > Except of course for censorship-resilient public rooms where it shines, which goes back to my point that "decentralized rooms" as an XMPP extension would have made sense. There are many more reasons for wanting decentralized rooms, e.g. autonomy, reliability, availability, anti-takeover - and it works for private rooms as well. Prospectively, it enables things like P2P and multi homing I would never want to go back to the XMPP like it is today. And XMPP today is not Matrix, even if you could turn it to Matrix, but what is the point of doing that? Matrix is already there! If you want Matrix to be an XMPP extension, I suggest creating a new XEP pointing to spec.matrix.org and call it XMPP v2. No idea what you would gain from it though.

What's so different about it? Historically XMPP was more geared towards message-passing without server-side archival, but that ship has long since sailed to support multi-client. As it is, i don't see any significant change except for the consensus algorithm for decentralized rooms which could very well be an extension to the XMPP s2s protocol.

pkulak 5y ago
https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-the-difference-between-matrix-and-xmpp%3F https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-the-difference-between-matri...
- southerntofu 5y ago
  Yes i understand that Matrix is a consensus-assembled JSON database. For the sake of argument, this could have been developed as an XMPP extension. In real life, you don't need or want a distributed consensus for simpler federated chat: it's been the cause of so many troubles across the Matrix ecosystem (room version incompatibilities, room takeovers due to netsplit, bad performance) that it's actually an argument against that building block. Except of course for censorship-resilient public rooms where it shines, which goes back to my point that "decentralized rooms" as an XMPP extension would have made sense.
  - kitkat_new 5y ago
    room versions are incompatible naturally and room takeovers were a bug. So saying it's the cause for these things, is misleading. At this time there are 9 room versions. Once the room version had to be incremented because of a bug in the consensus algorithm, which required a new algorithm, i.e. room version. That's it. Bugs happen when you create new tech... > Except of course for censorship-resilient public rooms where it shines, which goes back to my point that "decentralized rooms" as an XMPP extension would have made sense. There are many more reasons for wanting decentralized rooms, e.g. autonomy, reliability, availability, anti-takeover - and it works for private rooms as well. Prospectively, it enables things like P2P and multi homing I would never want to go back to the XMPP like it is today. And XMPP today is not Matrix, even if you could turn it to Matrix, but what is the point of doing that? Matrix is already there! If you want Matrix to be an XMPP extension, I suggest creating a new XEP pointing to spec.matrix.org and call it XMPP v2. No idea what you would gain from it though.