4 ms·
Sliding Sync is just your old bouncer with lip service and a fancy name, because the Matrix protocol is now officially deemed hopeless to be implemented efficie
by ezst 3y ago
Sliding Sync is just your old bouncer with lip service and a fancy name, because the Matrix protocol is now officially deemed hopeless to be implemented efficiently on the client side, hence the need for a proxy to maintain your "client state" i.e. your client running on the server.
I'm really tired of the litany of buzzwords and excuses that the Matrix team comes up to cover-up this large sunk cost fallacy of a protocol. Nobody needs a distributed graph database and state resolution to prop-up a chat system. It has not proven to have any real-world benefit nor served to build a niche in which Matrix is in any way better than the competition. It's been a failed experiment for about 10 years with no end in sight. At what point does the community wake up to all the nonsense?
- orange-mentor 3y agoI 100% agree with this. I wanted to like Matrix, and I ran synapse for a while, but the operational aspects of it are an order of magnitude more complex than XMPP. Perhaps the problem they're trying to solve warrants that complexity, but my particular use case doesn't. I just run XMPP now.
- panick21_ 3y agoThis comment makes no sense. The database replication has nothing to do with sliding sync. Sliding sync is about replacing the client to server protocol, and database replication is the server to server protocol. Its flat wrong to say that it can't be efficiently implemented on the client side, the server side of the Api is the problem, not the client.