Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] tox (was: maintainer-needed@ packages need you!)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:48:29
Message-Id: slrnm0r2as.acg.martin@bois.imp.fu-berlin.de
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-needed@ packages need you! by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 This discussion has now become rather OT and does not belong
2 to this list. Anyway, since there appear to be some misunderstandings
3 concerning my previous remarks, I contribute one more post.
4
5 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
6 >>> > > > Please don't. Not all communication partners are linux users.
7 >
8 > The (in)?famous network effect. A network grows in value based on the
9 > number of users it has...
10
11 Not only: You might convince your communication partners to switch.
12 However, they must be able to switch on *their* systems easily
13 (and not have to install linux or solve other technical obstacles).
14
15 >>> > So it doesn't work [...]
16 >>>
17 >>> Can't agree with you here. I just tried tox (utox client) from
18 >>> tox-overlay. Works like charm from the box [...]
19
20 Maybe from utox to utox. From utox to antox (the android client) -
21 which is the only case that I can reasonably test - I was only once
22 able to send a friends request from antox to utox, but no message,
23 and nothing in the opposite direction. After an antox upgrade,
24 I cannot even use my login anymore, probably since the ID has
25 changed due to upgrade...
26
27 Also, you cannot be behind a restrictive NAT. For instance, one of
28 my NAT routers cannot easily be configured to forward the exotic port,
29 and then there is also the problem of UDP hole punching - not sure,
30 whether this is solved in tox at all.
31
32 I never tried to examine how skype does it, but opening ports in
33 NAT routers was never necessary for skype, probably because it
34 switches ports automatically as required. Moreover, since it uses
35 a central server, there is no UDP punching problem.
36
37 Such "magic" (like automatic port switching) is required if you
38 really want to suggest it to users who are not computer-affine:
39 It must really be "configuration free" - also in difficult situations -
40 and work out of the box. Currently, it apparently works only on some
41 only-linux clients, and only if the network is configured fine
42 for them.
43
44 >> As long as the vast majority of my contacts use Skype and Yahoo
45 >
46 > That was the point above about not everyone being a Linux user
47
48 No, I think these are different points: My point was about whether
49 people are *technically* able to switch (if all agree). The other
50 is whether people are *socially* able to switch.
51 Of course, both must be solved, but the former is the requirement
52 for the latter, and tox still seems to have a long way to reach
53 the former.
54
55 >>> It should be noted that at least in Linux skype is much harder to
56 >>> install and use since it requires pulseaudio
57
58 But this concerns only Linux users who probably are computer-affine
59 and can solve such problems (or know somebody who is).
60
61 >>> So skype reqires its own LXC container set up
62
63 Not really. There is a forum post how to use skype (*only* skype)
64 with pulseaudio (once bug 519530 gets fixed, you can even do this
65 without patching any ebuild or configuration.)
66
67 To avoid a misunderstanding: I really oppose the non-privacy
68 policy of skype, and hardly can await until tox is ready.
69 However, the current state is that skype is without alteratives
70 for many people.
71 Moreover, suggesting tox to casual computer users too early -
72 like now when many technical problems are not yet solved -
73 would be rather contraproductive and actually kill tox:
74 People who once had a bad experience will likely refuse to switch
75 when tox *is* ready.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] tox Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@g.o>