Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} open-source: chat, tasks, resources, code

[Marc Joliet]

Am Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:50:51 +0200
schrieb Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:30:16 +0100
> Marc Joliet <marcec@×××.de> wrote:
>
> > Am Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:04:46 -0800
> > schrieb Grant <emailgrant@×××××.com>:
> >
> > [...]
> > > > XMPP clients are a dime a dozen, take you pick: pidgin, kopete,
> > > > telepathy and a hots of others.
> > > >
> > > > Servers are another story. All of them that you can lay your
> > > > hands on seem to suck big eggs big time. ejabberd is the only one
> > > > I found stable enough to actually stay up for sane amounts of
> > > > time, and not DEPEND on java.
> > > >
> > > > But that info might be well out of date, I haven't looked at our
> > > > jabber server for ages. There's no need to - the techies all
> > > > gravitated by themselves over to GTalk and Skype, claiming that
> > > > the cloud services did everything they needed and more, and it
> > > > was there, and it worked. Our in-house jabber server - not so
> > > > much.
> > > >
> > > > Can't say I blame them. It's true.
> > >
> > > Thanks Alan, this is just the kind of info I need.  It sounds like
> > > I would be better off with a cloud solution for collaborative chat.
> >
> > Just out of curiosity: why couldn't you use a Jabber client with
> > Bonjour/Zeroconf support (all or most of them?) within the company
> > (which is what this is for IIUC)? With Zeroconf, the Jabber clients
> > "find each other", then you wouldn't need to bother with setting up a
> > server.
> >
> > Or is Zeroconf problematic? I know Pidgin can do Zeroconf on Windows,
> > even if you need to manually install a separate package for it to
> > work.
> >
>
> That doesn't really work when one fellow is at his desk in the office,
> another at home on an ADSL connection and the third is a 3rd party dev
> based in Los Angeles. That's quite common for me.
>
> Zeroconf has it's uses, but it does have a rather narrow scope as to
> where it can work.

I understand that, I just thought that Grant was talking about a purely
internal chat solution (like my workplace has) - he did say "within a
company" (though admittedly in retrospect I realize that that doesn't
necessarily mean *physically* within the company).

Regardless, it isn't clear to me that Grant is talking about something that has
to be available from anywhere. While he is apparently gravitating towards a
"cloud solution" for chat, my understanding is that that is because then he
doesn't have to manage his own server. All of the other solutions mentioned
could be for internal *and* external use.

Anyway, I was just curious and thought that if this is purely for internal use
than Zeroconf might be a good server-less option for chat.

-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup