[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms



On 19-03-25 12 h 54, Ansgar wrote:
> a lot of communication in Debian happens over IRC.  However IRC is not
> as nice to use as newer alternatives, creating a barrier for newer
> contributors.

The way I see it, IRC is a barrier for new contributors, but there are
ways to make IRC more accessible:

1. Someone could host a ZNC bouncer on a .debian.net address and offer
accounts.

This seems like the easier solution, but the experience would still not
be up to par with something like Matrix.


2. Someone could host a weechat server on a .debian.net address and have
them be accessible through a Glowing Bear instance [1]

I've been using Glowing Bear for a while now and it's a really modern
experience. You can log in your IRC session directly in any browser,
notifications use the Notification Web API [2], there is sound of out of
the box, links to 'popular' websites can be rendered directly in the
chat window, etc.

A quick look in the Debian archive tells me most (if not all) of the
Glowing Bear deps are already packaged. I'm sure it wouldn't be that
hard to package it.

(now that I'm talking about it, maybe I should... 🤔)

Running weechat as a relay also means you can use Android apps like
weechat-android [3] to connect on mobile devices.

The main problem would be to host weechat sessions securely. One would
need to ensure good user isolation and look at securing weechat [4]

Anyway, my point is: IRC is working well for tons of people already.
Instead of trying to replace it, efforts could be made to make it easier
to use for all.

[1] https://github.com/glowing-bear/glowing-bear
[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/notification
[3] https://github.com/ubergeek42/weechat-android
[4] https://github.com/weechat/weechat/issues/928

-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   pollo@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: