1 |
> > > > > XMPP clients are a dime a dozen, take you pick: pidgin, kopete, |
2 |
> > > > > telepathy and a hots of others. |
3 |
> > > > > |
4 |
> > > > > Servers are another story. All of them that you can lay your |
5 |
> > > > > hands on seem to suck big eggs big time. ejabberd is the only one |
6 |
> > > > > I found stable enough to actually stay up for sane amounts of |
7 |
> > > > > time, and not DEPEND on java. |
8 |
> > > > > |
9 |
> > > > > But that info might be well out of date, I haven't looked at our |
10 |
> > > > > jabber server for ages. There's no need to - the techies all |
11 |
> > > > > gravitated by themselves over to GTalk and Skype, claiming that |
12 |
> > > > > the cloud services did everything they needed and more, and it |
13 |
> > > > > was there, and it worked. Our in-house jabber server - not so |
14 |
> > > > > much. |
15 |
> > > > > |
16 |
> > > > > Can't say I blame them. It's true. |
17 |
> > > > |
18 |
> > > > Thanks Alan, this is just the kind of info I need. It sounds like |
19 |
> > > > I would be better off with a cloud solution for collaborative chat. |
20 |
> > > |
21 |
> > > Just out of curiosity: why couldn't you use a Jabber client with |
22 |
> > > Bonjour/Zeroconf support (all or most of them?) within the company |
23 |
> > > (which is what this is for IIUC)? With Zeroconf, the Jabber clients |
24 |
> > > "find each other", then you wouldn't need to bother with setting up a |
25 |
> > > server. |
26 |
> > > |
27 |
> > > Or is Zeroconf problematic? I know Pidgin can do Zeroconf on Windows, |
28 |
> > > even if you need to manually install a separate package for it to |
29 |
> > > work. |
30 |
> > > |
31 |
> > |
32 |
> > That doesn't really work when one fellow is at his desk in the office, |
33 |
> > another at home on an ADSL connection and the third is a 3rd party dev |
34 |
> > based in Los Angeles. That's quite common for me. |
35 |
> > |
36 |
> > Zeroconf has it's uses, but it does have a rather narrow scope as to |
37 |
> > where it can work. |
38 |
> |
39 |
> I understand that, I just thought that Grant was talking about a purely |
40 |
> internal chat solution (like my workplace has) - he did say "within a |
41 |
> company" (though admittedly in retrospect I realize that that doesn't |
42 |
> necessarily mean *physically* within the company). |
43 |
> |
44 |
> Regardless, it isn't clear to me that Grant is talking about something |
45 |
that has |
46 |
> to be available from anywhere. While he is apparently gravitating towards |
47 |
a |
48 |
> "cloud solution" for chat, my understanding is that that is because then |
49 |
he |
50 |
> doesn't have to manage his own server. All of the other solutions |
51 |
mentioned |
52 |
> could be for internal *and* external use. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Anyway, I was just curious and thought that if this is purely for |
55 |
internal use |
56 |
> than Zeroconf might be a good server-less option for chat. |
57 |
|
58 |
I should have specified that the people in the organization are spread out |
59 |
in different locations. |
60 |
|
61 |
It sounds like it is difficult/dangerous to run an internet-facing IRC |
62 |
server and ejabberd is unstable? |
63 |
|
64 |
Besides chat, has anyone tried egroupware? |
65 |
|
66 |
- Grant |