1:04 p.m.
Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC network
for our project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes to that
network, the Fedora Project is moving our IRC communications to Libera.Chat.
If you are a current IRC user, please go and register your nick(s) on
Libera.Chat ( https://libera.chat/guides/registration#registering ) and
rejoin the #fedora related channels you wish to. You can take this
opportunity to choose a new secure password and make sure you are
connecting via SSL. There is good documentation about choosing an IRC
client at https://libera.chat/guides/clients
If you are a Matrix user, we ask for your patience as we get bridges setup
on the new network. If you were joined to rooms via the generic freenode
bridge, you will need to leave them and rejoin the fedora rooms in matrix
(which will be plumbed with the Libera channels)
As of 2021-05-28 our official IRC presence is on irc.libera.chat.
Many Fedora channels have moved over and are ready on Libera.Chat. However,
less-used channels have not be automatically setup. If you need a specific
#fedora-* IRC channel setup, please file a ticket at http://pagure.io/irc
requesting the channel.
New channels should have the same name as they did on freenode. For
example: #fedora, #fedora-admin, #fedora-devel, and #fedora-join.
If you would like a fedora IRC ‘cloak’ you can request it at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LiberaCloaks
(an IRC cloak obfuscates your client host address and shows ‘fedora’
instead). Please note that cloaks are not foolproof, there are ways for
people to still get your IP, but they do make it more difficult for people
to obtain your IP.
Also, look for upcoming exciting announcements around Fedora’s Matrix
presence.
nb
_______________________________________________
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedora...
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
11:01 a.m.
On 5/27/21 2:04 PM, Nick Bebout wrote:
Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC
network for our project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes to that
network, the Fedora Project is moving our IRC communications to Libera.Chat.
If a still-fuzzy "variety of recent changes to that network" are the reason for
this latest fire-drill/tempest, then just fyi,
A Lee's provided some documented reply,
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freenode/web-7.0/main/static/files/on-f...
https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
To my read it doesn't seem as clear-cut as some are making it all out to be. If
'trust' is the underlying issue here, there seems to be enuf not passing the smell
test on 'both sides'.
IME, projects want a place to talk that's trustworthy.
caveat emptor.
11:14 a.m.
On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 12:01 -0400, PGNet Dev wrote:
On 5/27/21 2:04 PM, Nick Bebout wrote:
> Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC network for our
project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes to that network, the Fedora
Project is moving our IRC communications to Libera.Chat.
If a still-fuzzy "variety of recent changes to that network" are the reason for
this latest fire-drill/tempest, then just fyi,
A Lee's provided some documented reply,
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freenode/web-7.0/main/static/files/on-freenode.pdf
https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
To my read it doesn't seem as clear-cut as some are making it all out to be. If
'trust' is the underlying issue here, there seems to be enuf not passing the smell
test on 'both sides'.
IME, projects want a place to talk that's trustworthy.
Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a libera.chat
link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened to
multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
instance.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
11:26 a.m.
On 5/28/21 12:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 12:01 -0400, PGNet Dev wrote:
> On 5/27/21 2:04 PM, Nick Bebout wrote:
>> Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC network for
our project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes to that network, the Fedora
Project is moving our IRC communications to Libera.Chat.
>
> If a still-fuzzy "variety of recent changes to that network" are the reason
for this latest fire-drill/tempest, then just fyi,
> A Lee's provided some documented reply,
>
>
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freenode/web-7.0/main/static/files/on-freenode.pdf
> https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
>
> To my read it doesn't seem as clear-cut as some are making it all out to be. If
'trust' is the underlying issue here, there seems to be enuf not passing the smell
test on 'both sides'.
>
> IME, projects want a place to talk that's trustworthy.
Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a libera.chat
link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened to
multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
instance.
Sure. And, what? Not the 1st time projects have acted on "don't talk about
other projects in here" ...
Did anyone try to contact @freenode about that? I certainly dunno about that. Maybe so,
maybe not.
Just reading through those screenshotted chats, etc, seems 2 me there's enough
"shouldn't have handled it that way" to go around.
I'm not 'defending' _any_ purile/petty/powermad/etc. BS.
I'm jut fyi'ing here, in the hopes that folks will make / have made an informed
decision -- and pick-their-poison, and not simply to the lemmings-off-a-cliff biz cuz,
"hey, it's the new hotness".
If it's all thoroughly researched, understood, and rationally decided, then I'm
certainly cool with it.
All _I_ heard was some buzz in #fedora* @ freenode a week or so back that "moving
fast/immediately is too hard, and would be too disruptive to users", and then
suddenly, this^^ email.
Beyond that, not a clue as to what discussion was had. Not that it's "my
project" to begin with, so few expectations 'bout that in the 1st place.
11:57 a.m.
On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 12:26 -0400, PGNet Dev wrote:
On 5/28/21 12:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 12:01 -0400, PGNet Dev wrote:
> > On 5/27/21 2:04 PM, Nick Bebout wrote:
> > > Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC network
for our project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes to that network, the
Fedora Project is moving our IRC communications to Libera.Chat.
> >
> > If a still-fuzzy "variety of recent changes to that network" are the
reason for this latest fire-drill/tempest, then just fyi,
> > A Lee's provided some documented reply,
> >
> >
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freenode/web-7.0/main/static/files/on-freenode.pdf
> > https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
> >
> > To my read it doesn't seem as clear-cut as some are making it all out to
be. If 'trust' is the underlying issue here, there seems to be enuf not passing
the smell test on 'both sides'.
> >
> > IME, projects want a place to talk that's trustworthy.
>
> Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a libera.chat
> link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened to
> multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
> instance.
Sure. And, what? Not the 1st time projects have acted on "don't talk about
other projects in here" ...
Did anyone try to contact @freenode about that? I certainly dunno about that. Maybe so,
maybe not.
There was a huge backlash which resulted in a half-hearted not-really-
an-apology a couple of days ago:
https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
but at that point the damage was already pretty comprehensively done.
Just reading through those screenshotted chats, etc, seems 2 me
there's enough "shouldn't have handled it that way" to go around.
Personally speaking I don't tend to care a lot about what people (from
any group) were saying to each other in private conversations behind
the scenes. However, the fact that only one party is releasing private
conversations presumably without the consent of the other party
seems...significant, especially when one of the more important trusts
we place in the parties in question is to protect the privacy of tens
of thousands of *other* people's private conversations.
If it's all thoroughly researched, understood, and rationally decided, then I'm
certainly cool with it.
All _I_ heard was some buzz in #fedora* @ freenode a week or so back that "moving
fast/immediately is too hard, and would be too disruptive to users", and then
suddenly, this^^ email.
Yeah, that was the position initially, when it wasn't entirely clear if
there was a Right Side and a Wrong Side, and there was no completely
clear reason to question the good faith of either side. We figured we'd
hedge for some time at least, as did many other projects. No-one
particularly wanted to spend several days at pantscon 1 shifting a ton
of stuff from one IRC network to another. But Freenode taking over
hundreds of channels that did nothing more than put a link to another
channel on another network in their #topic rather focused people's
minds on the issue, I think.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
12:16 p.m.
one of the more important trusts
we place in the parties in
question is to protect the privacy of tens
of thousands of *other* people's private conversations.
Sure. As do we all. Mostly. Kind of. Ok, hopefully.
Again, to _my_ read, _I_ see absolutely nothing in either side's recent behavior that
builds _my_ trust.
And sufficient cause for it to be called into some question. By _me_.
If privacy of _credentials_ are in question, again, there's nothing but assumptions
here.
Unless/until _I_ see provable behavior, contractual accountability, and auditable
infrastructure, _I_ remain ... diligent.
If privacy of _discussions_ are in question, then #IRC isn't the right platform to
start with. At all.
And arguing about who's more trustworthy in managing privacy in an infra with the
general leak-proofing of a pasta colander, is simply circular-debate about the color of
the lipstick on the pig.
Paraphrasing the old adage -- takes a lifetime to build a rep, 5 seconds to lose one.
BOTH sides have lost trust & rep.
In the end, I'm not convinced it was worth the "pantscon 1" (chuckle)
hullabaloo, and wait to see if more harm than good comes of it.
So thought I'd add/share a doc or 2 to read.
/me is really shutting up now. About this, anyway.
9:41 p.m.
adamwill wrote:
Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a libera.chat
link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened to
multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
instance.
Those organizations have announced their departure. Surely freenode's
RESPONSE to that departure cannot be used as the REASON for the
departure. That'd be circular reasoning and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
- FChE
11:02 p.m.
Frank Ch. Eigler writes:
adamwill wrote:
> Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a
libera.chat
> link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened to
> multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
> instance.
Those organizations have announced their departure. Surely freenode's
RESPONSE to that departure cannot be used as the REASON for the
departure. That'd be circular reasoning and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The *reason* for leaving is that channel organizers trust the Freenode
volunteer staff to be reasonably accurate in discussing organizational
politics, and don't trust the new management to behave ethically or do
a good job of managing the service. Channels acted in *expectation*
of nasty behavior by the new management, based on how they acted
toward the staff during the takeover (as reported by the staff), and
perhaps based on Andrew Lee's past unsavory behavior and associations
-- I mean, hiring Mark Karpeles of "Mt. Gox" infamy as CTO is a sign
of crony capitalism, not good intentions or competence!
The *response* of the management during and after the exodus is
advanced as confirmation of that mistrust; it's elliptical in the
sense of omitting discussion of the difference between expectation and
reality, but it's not circular.
Steve
--
All puns intended.
12:45 p.m.
On Sun, 2021-05-30 at 13:02 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Frank Ch. Eigler writes:
> adamwill wrote:
> > Freenode has also shut down every channel that posted a libera.chat
> > link in its topic. That's not very 'trustworthy'. This happened
to
> > multiple Fedora-related projects/channels, including #cockpit , for
> > instance.
>
> Those organizations have announced their departure. Surely freenode's
> RESPONSE to that departure cannot be used as the REASON for the
> departure. That'd be circular reasoning and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The *reason* for leaving is that channel organizers trust the Freenode
volunteer staff to be reasonably accurate in discussing organizational
politics, and don't trust the new management to behave ethically or do
a good job of managing the service. Channels acted in *expectation*
of nasty behavior by the new management, based on how they acted
toward the staff during the takeover (as reported by the staff), and
perhaps based on Andrew Lee's past unsavory behavior and associations
-- I mean, hiring Mark Karpeles of "Mt. Gox" infamy as CTO is a sign
of crony capitalism, not good intentions or competence!
The *response* of the management during and after the exodus is
advanced as confirmation of that mistrust; it's elliptical in the
sense of omitting discussion of the difference between expectation and
reality, but it's not circular.
That's a good line, but not the one I was thinking of :P
Fedora was initially inclined to take a cautious/conservative position,
probably owning its channels on both networks and perhaps leaving the
'official' location for meetings and so on on Freenode.
But some other channels that are not Fedora channels, but which a lot
of Fedora people are interested in, decided to move, or at least to
tell people that they also had a channel on the new network. Then
Freenode peremptorily took over those channels for posting links to the
new channel.
Fedora people seeing that happen was, I think, a fairly large factor in
causing us to rethink the cautious approach and choose to just straight
up move networks instead.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
5:26 a.m.
Adam Williamson <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
[...]
But some other channels that are not Fedora channels, but which a lot
of Fedora people are interested in, decided to move, or at least to
tell people that they also had a channel on the new network. Then
Freenode peremptorily took over those channels for posting links to the
new channel.
In the cases where the projects announced their outright move to a new
server, it stands to reason that keeping an "official" (#name) channel
is no longer appropriate at the old network. The response of cleaning
up after a no-longer-official channel cannot logically be used to
justify moving the channel in the first place - this is the circular
reasoning I was referring to.
- FChE
11:58 a.m.
On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 06:26 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Adam Williamson <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
> [...]
> But some other channels that are not Fedora channels, but which a lot
> of Fedora people are interested in, decided to move, or at least to
> tell people that they also had a channel on the new network. Then
> Freenode peremptorily took over those channels for posting links to the
> new channel.
In the cases where the projects announced their outright move to a new
server, it stands to reason that keeping an "official" (#name) channel
is no longer appropriate at the old network. The response of cleaning
up after a no-longer-official channel cannot logically be used to
justify moving the channel in the first place - this is the circular
reasoning I was referring to.
The response to channel B moving or just referring to a new channel for
B on a different server, however, can inform channel A's decision to
move. Which is what I said.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
11:15 a.m.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:01 PM PGNet Dev <pgnet.dev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/27/21 2:04 PM, Nick Bebout wrote:
> Since its beginnings, the Fedora Project has used the freenode IRC
network for our project communications. Due to a variety of recent changes
to that network, the Fedora Project is moving our IRC communications to
Libera.Chat.
If a still-fuzzy "variety of recent changes to that network" are the
reason for this latest fire-drill/tempest, then just fyi,
A Lee's provided some documented reply,
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freenode/web-7.0/main/static/files/on-f...
https://freenode.net/news/post-mortem-may21
To my read it doesn't seem as clear-cut as some are making it all out to
be. If 'trust' is the underlying issue here, there seems to be enuf not
passing the smell test on 'both sides'.
IME, projects want a place to talk that's trustworthy.
caveat emptor.
Andrew Lee has a flexible relationship with the truth. This is not a both
sides issue, as every other free software project has also agreed.
-Dan
11:33 a.m.
Andrew Lee has a flexible relationship with the truth. This is not a
both sides issue, as every other free software project has also agreed.
Well, it seems you're good then. So, great.
Just for me, not my 1st rodeo dealing with the spectrum from
megalomaniacal-sociopathic-CEOs to petulant-lemming-staff-actions
And, like I said, to my read, not so clear cut, despite declarations that "This is
not a both sides issue".
I just shared some add'l info that I thought was relevant so folks could read a bit
(more) & make their OWN decisions rather than just blindly do what (arguably)
"every other free software project" is doing.
11:34 a.m.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:32 PM PGNet Dev <pgnet.dev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrew Lee has a flexible relationship with the truth. This is
not a
both sides issue, as every other free software project has also agreed.
Well, it seems you're good then. So, great.
Just for me, not my 1st rodeo dealing with the spectrum from
megalomaniacal-sociopathic-CEOs to petulant-lemming-staff-actions
And, like I said, to my read, not so clear cut, despite declarations that
"This is not a both sides issue".
I just shared some add'l info that I thought was relevant so folks could
read a bit (more) & make their OWN decisions rather than just blindly do
what (arguably) "every other free software project" is doing.
That's fine. It's good to have all the information. This is just my
opinion, but while everyone has made mistakes, this mass migration is due
specifically to Andrew Lee's actions.
-Dan
11:42 a.m.
due specifically to Andrew Lee's actions.
I'd bet $0.05 and a half-eaten donut that most folks shrieking about this would be
hard-pressed to regurgitate much of anything beyond 'headlines', with little
actual insight into objective details.
But then, I'm often wrong.
Now, back to real work for me.
12:13 p.m.
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 4:42 PM PGNet Dev <pgnet.dev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'd bet $0.05 and a half-eaten donut that most folks ....
*Most* folks are not the deciders. The deciders
(for their particular projects) have decided,
presumably based on what they believe is best
for their community. In this case, for Fedora,
that is libera (and matrix integration).
One will likely never understand the complete
motivations for various actions, but it is clear
there were a number of unforced errors that
resulted in the need to "revise and extend"
remarks, and issue multiple clarifications (you
really only get one chance to make things right).
10:01 a.m.
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 8:11 PM Nick Bebout <nick(a)bebout.net> wrote:
If you are a Matrix user, we ask for your patience as we get bridges
setup
on the new network. If you were joined to rooms via the generic freenode
bridge, you will need to leave them and rejoin the fedora rooms in matrix
(which will be plumbed with the Libera channels)
Is there some official list of invite-style links to Fedora channels for
Matrix users? Can be work-in-progress, but at least something. As a
relatively new Matrix user, I have to say I'm utterly confused at the
moment. I don't know how to distinguish a native Matrix room from a "portal
room". I don't know how to distinguish whether a room is bridged or not,
and where to. So basically I don't know whether to stay in the current
rooms or leave, and how to find the "right rooms" which I should join.
If I intend to use Matrix exclusively, do I still need to register on
libera.chat, in order to participate in Fedora rooms?
Has someone also encountered severe performance issues in certain rooms in
Element (a room taking minutes of full CPU usage to load)? I saw it in the
past rarely as well, but in the last few days I encountered it in at least
half the rooms I was connected to.
11:53 a.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 5:02 PM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
(snip)
> Is there some official list of invite-style links to
Fedora channels for Matrix users? Can be work-in-progress, but at least something. As a
relatively new Matrix user, I have to say I'm utterly confused at the moment. I
don't know how to distinguish a native Matrix room from a "portal room". I
don't know how to distinguish whether a room is bridged or not, and where to. So
basically I don't know whether to stay in the current rooms or leave, and how to find
the "right rooms" which I should join.
Yeah, it would be great to have an official list. It's also different
with libera compared to how it was set up for freenode, further
complicating things ...
When the bridge was set up for freenode, it was as easy as sending
"!join #fedora-foo" to appservice-irc and it would invite you to the
"correct" plumbed room, though on the IRC side. With Libera, that
doesn't seem to work right (yet?).
What I tried was to look at the "Fedora" space, choose the equivalent
Matrix room to the IRC room I want, and join it. Then sending
"!listrooms" to "@appservice:libera.chat" will tell you whether it is
a bridged / plumbed room or not, and which rooms are linked to it.
If I intend to use Matrix exclusively, do I still need to register on
libera.chat, in order to participate in Fedora rooms?
I think if you want to show up on the IRC side with your expected IRC
nick (for example, for IRC meetings, for zodbot to recognise you, and
for IRC rooms that are set up to only allow registered users), then
you will need to register on libera.chat and then set up that account
with "@appservice:libera.chat" ("!username foo", "!storepass
bar",
"!nick baz" should do the trick, and allow you to authenticate over
SASL - at least that worked for me).
Has someone also encountered severe performance issues in certain
rooms in Element (a room taking minutes of full CPU usage to load)? I saw it in the past
rarely as well, but in the last few days I encountered it in at least half the rooms I was
connected to.
Yes, I think that's a known issue for "plumbed" rooms like "Fedora
Devel" / #fedora-devel, where there's a lot of Join / Leave messages
from the IRC side. Those rooms are quite unusable in the element web
client, and if I need to look at them, I open them in the element
Android app (which does not seem to have this performance problem),
and other Matrix clients (like Fractal) also don't seem to have that
particular issue.
Fabio
12:50 p.m.
On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 18:53 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 5:02 PM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>
(snip)
>
> Is there some official list of invite-style links to Fedora
> channels for Matrix users? Can be work-in-progress, but at least
> something. As a relatively new Matrix user, I have to say I'm
> utterly confused at the moment. I don't know how to distinguish a
> native Matrix room from a "portal room". I don't know how to
> distinguish whether a room is bridged or not, and where to. So
> basically I don't know whether to stay in the current rooms or
> leave, and how to find the "right rooms" which I should join.
Yeah, it would be great to have an official list. It's also different
with libera compared to how it was set up for freenode, further
complicating things ...
When the bridge was set up for freenode, it was as easy as sending
"!join #fedora-foo" to appservice-irc and it would invite you to the
"correct" plumbed room, though on the IRC side. With Libera, that
doesn't seem to work right (yet?).
This is I think because it's all still very much 'under development'. I
don't think it makes much sense for folks to spend time writing lists
that are likely to rapidly become outdated, rather than continuing to
work on setting things up the way we actually want them to be.
Matrix and Libera are still working on the bridging stuff, it's not
completely 'done' yet, even though it works to some extent. And Fedora
admins are still working on setting up bespoke bridges for the cases
where we have a 'native' Matrix room. I'd expect that once all that
work is actually done and we have a stable state to document, it can
get documented.
BTW, using "!join" did work for me for the one room I tried it for,
though there was a long delay between issuing the command and getting
the invite. I think it's intended to work and if it doesn't it's just
because, again, they're still setting things up here.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
1:35 p.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:50:15AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
This is I think because it's all still very much 'under development'. I
don't think it makes much sense for folks to spend time writing lists
that are likely to rapidly become outdated, rather than continuing to
work on setting things up the way we actually want them to be.
Yep. Completely agreed.
The last status of the matrix/libera bridges on friday (at least that I
saw) was "Bridge is up and available for testing, be aware that it may
be a bit wobbly while we work on issues" and the person doing the work
on it said they would be back wed to start fixing more issues.
I'll mention here that there's two ways to bridge things (at least per
my understanding):
1. There's a site wide bridge allowing matrix users to join
#channel:libera.chat But they have to know to do that.
2. There's "plumbed rooms" where a bridge is setup from a specific irc
room to a specific matrix room. In this case matrix users just join
"Fedora Development" or whatever and irc users just join #fedora-devel
and everything is bridged. This is the state we want, with all or almost
all our rooms.
Even how those work is kind of in flux. There's problems when say irc
channels quiet all non identified users (mode "$~a"). In some cases we
auto 'voice' matrix users so they can avoid the identification
requirement (I personally don't like this). They may come up with other
ways to do things over the coming weeks.
For both of them you can open a conversation with
@appservice:libera.chat and use commands to manage the irc side of
matrix connections. Send '!help' to get a list of commands.
Finally, all this is subject to change, because the Fedora project
hopefully really soon now is getting our own matrix home server.
In this new server people would login with their account system info and
get a @user:fedora.im (or fedoraproject.org) account. Additionally,
matrix has been working on a thing called "spaces" which we will likely
use. This makes matrix more 'discord like' in that you could join
"Fedora Project" or whatever, get joined to specific rooms and have all
the rooms setup under a Fedora Project umbrealla. ie, There would no
longer be a "Fedora Devel"(a)matrix.org room but a "Devel" space under
fedoraproject on our homeserver. The intention as I know it currently is
to still plumb rooms into irc like option 2 above once we have
spaces/homeserver setup.
So, yeah, sadly everything is kind of in flux right now. :(
I wish all this IRC mess didn't happen, but sadly it did.
kevin
3:22 p.m.
Hi Fabio,
On Monday, 2021-05-31 18:53:35 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Has someone also encountered severe performance issues in
certain rooms in Element (a room taking minutes of full CPU usage to load)? I saw it in
the past rarely as well, but in the last few days I encountered it in at least half the
rooms I was connected to.
Yes, I think that's a known issue for "plumbed" rooms like "Fedora
Devel" / #fedora-devel, where there's a lot of Join / Leave messages
from the IRC side. Those rooms are quite unusable in the element web
client, and if I need to look at them, I open them in the element
Android app (which does not seem to have this performance problem),
and other Matrix clients (like Fractal) also don't seem to have that
particular issue.
Maybe it helps in Element Web, Settings, Preferences, to deactivate
"Show join/leave messages (invites/kicks/bans unaffected)"
Eike
--
GPG key 0x6A6CD5B765632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 2D3A
3:43 p.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:22 PM Eike Rathke <erack(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Fabio,
On Monday, 2021-05-31 18:53:35 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Has someone also encountered severe performance issues in certain rooms in
Element (a room taking minutes of full CPU usage to load)? I saw it in the past rarely as
well, but in the last few days I encountered it in at least half the rooms I was connected
to.
>
> Yes, I think that's a known issue for "plumbed" rooms like
"Fedora
> Devel" / #fedora-devel, where there's a lot of Join / Leave messages
> from the IRC side. Those rooms are quite unusable in the element web
> client, and if I need to look at them, I open them in the element
> Android app (which does not seem to have this performance problem),
> and other Matrix clients (like Fractal) also don't seem to have that
> particular issue.
Maybe it helps in Element Web, Settings, Preferences, to deactivate
"Show join/leave messages (invites/kicks/bans unaffected)"
Thanks for the suggestion, but I already had that setting turned off for months.
Weirdly enough, turning it *back on* seems to make performance of the
#fedora-devel room more bearable. It's still very very bad -
considering this is running on a recent top-of-the-line 8-core CPU
from 2021 ... the join/leave messages add a lot of noise, but at least
opening #fedora-devel doesn't make Firefox freeze for half a minute 😅
Fabio
2:58 a.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:44 PM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Maybe it helps in Element Web, Settings, Preferences, to
deactivate
> "Show join/leave messages (invites/kicks/bans unaffected)"
Thanks for the suggestion, but I already had that setting turned off for
months.
Weirdly enough, turning it *back on* seems to make performance of the
#fedora-devel room more bearable. It's still very very bad -
considering this is running on a recent top-of-the-line 8-core CPU
from 2021 ... the join/leave messages add a lot of noise, but at least
opening #fedora-devel doesn't make Firefox freeze for half a minute 😅
Thanks! It adds a lot of visual noise, but the rooms can finally be used
now.
3:38 a.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 6:55 PM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> If I intend to use Matrix exclusively, do I still need to
register on
libera.chat, in order to participate in Fedora rooms?
I think if you want to show up on the IRC side with your expected IRC
nick (for example, for IRC meetings, for zodbot to recognise you, and
for IRC rooms that are set up to only allow registered users), then
you will need to register on libera.chat and then set up that account
with "@appservice:libera.chat" ("!username foo", "!storepass
bar",
"!nick baz" should do the trick, and allow you to authenticate over
SASL - at least that worked for me).
This helped a lot, thanks.
I'd still prefer if I didn't have to register an IRC nick and didn't need
to communicate with Appservice and NickServ (I just wish to forget about
IRC completely), hopefully that will be possible in the future.
2:57 p.m.
Hi Kamil,
On Tuesday, 2021-06-01 10:38:40 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
I'd still prefer if I didn't have to register an IRC nick and
didn't need
to communicate with Appservice and NickServ (I just wish to forget about
IRC completely), hopefully that will be possible in the future.
Doubtful. You can not expect to not register a nick on IRC and at the
same time to use that nick. You can however join IRC without registering
a nick, but your mxname[m] nick will be changed to Guest#### after 30
seconds not having identified with NickServ. Well, if channels don't
require a registered nick that is.. and you can't do a PM chat without
having a registered nick.
On the other hand, registering a nick and doing !username and !storepass
with appservice is a one time action and then just forget.
Eike
--
GPG key 0x6A6CD5B765632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 2D3A
2:22 a.m.
Il 01/06/21 21:57, Eike Rathke ha scritto:
Hi Kamil,
On Tuesday, 2021-06-01 10:38:40 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
> I'd still prefer if I didn't have to register an IRC nick and didn't
need
> to communicate with Appservice and NickServ (I just wish to forget about
> IRC completely), hopefully that will be possible in the future.
Doubtful. You can not expect to not register a nick on IRC and at the
same time to use that nick. You can however join IRC without registering
a nick, but your mxname[m] nick will be changed to Guest#### after 30
seconds not having identified with NickServ. Well, if channels don't
require a registered nick that is.. and you can't do a PM chat without
having a registered nick.
On the other hand, registering a nick and doing !username and !storepass
with appservice is a one time action and then just forget.
Eike
Well, my problem is that my fas name `mattia` (not a great fantasy here)
is already registered to some other user on IRC (both freenode and
libera), so I have to use something else in Fedora channels.
This is the reason I'm eagarly awaiting for swiching to Matrix and use
my fas authentication.
Mattia
7:42 a.m.
Will projects switch hosting?
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fosshost-Freenode
1058
days inactive
1064
days old
26 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
Adam Williamson -
Dan Book -
Eike Rathke -
Fabio Valentini -
Frank Ch. Eigler -
Gary Buhrmaster -
Kamil Paral -
Kevin Fenzi -
Leigh Scott -
Mattia Verga -
Nick Bebout -
PGNet Dev -
Stephen J. Turnbull