[HN Gopher] Revolt: FOSS Discord Alternative ___________________________________________________________________ Revolt: FOSS Discord Alternative Author : hyperific Score : 125 points Date : 2023-06-22 15:38 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (revolt.chat) (TXT) w3m dump (revolt.chat) | mannycalavera42 wrote: | I prefer the radio controlled micromachine game | jrm4 wrote: | If this is decentralized/federated than they should make a bigger | deal of that on the page, and if it's not, well, no thanks. | tredre3 wrote: | > We don't think federation is beneficial to Revolt and would | actively hinder our stance on privacy. In short, federation is | prone to leaking your metadata, could make removing your data | harder, and we otherwise have no incentive to develop support | if it we aren't able to use it for the main platform | (revolt.chat). | | https://developers.revolt.chat/faq/federation | jrm4 wrote: | Tough love coming then -- then unless we pay you directly, | there's no good incentive for anyone to believe that you'll | be able to always deliver your claimed advantages over | Discord. | veave wrote: | They don't seem to claim any advantages over Discord, at | least on their home page. | paulmd wrote: | It's self-hosted FOSS, you're not paying anyone directly | and if you don't feel it delivers something you can write | it yourself or pay to have it written. | | Anyway, this gets into a philosophical point about the | whole Reddit exodus - ID federation and content federation | are two different things, and when people talk about the | friction of joining a forum vs clicking subscribe on | reddit, ID federation is what gives you that, not content | federation. | | And content federation introduces a lot of scalability | problems, and difficulties deleting comments/etc. Yes, | someone can notionally always crawl/cache you, but having | it on your server is different from intentionally putting | it out into a peer-to-peer CDN, or serving it to a bunch of | different pods so they can put it in their members' feeds. | Some people don't want that part, they want the content to | stay on their self-hosted instance. | riskable wrote: | This is disingenuous considering there's plenty of Lemmy | servers that aren't federated. Just because a thing | _supports_ federation doesn 't mean it _must_ be federated. | | If Revolt supported federation it would be trivial to just | turn that feature off if you had privacy concerns in that | regards. | djbusby wrote: | And default off, for privacy. | jackothy wrote: | You should mention the big red warning box above that text: | | > Hold on, this article is quite old at this point, just a | few things to keep in mind: | | > - Federation may end up being part of the project in some | capacity in the future, just at the moment it is not part of | any feature (at least publicly) on the roadmap. | | > - The complexity and time arguments below are still valid | but may be necessary to tackle in the future. | | > If you have some general ideas on where and how federation | could be implemented, feel free to drop into the Lounge | #Revolt Development. | DreamFlasher wrote: | Fullack. Is it based on Matrix and federates with it? If no, no | thanks. | RobotToaster wrote: | Not really necessary if the client can connect to multiple | servers. | Zambyte wrote: | Federated identity is pretty important for a seamless | experience in the case where chat itself js not federated | though. Otherwise you're still going to need to make a new | account for every server you join, which is more friction | than people want. | gigel82 wrote: | You can fully self host it (server and everything): | https://github.com/revoltchat/self-hosted | | This is for folks that want a self-governed / "no big brother" | Discord alternative, it's quite nice for that purpose, but it's | lacking the Discord integrations (audio chat, etc.) that make | it better for gamers. | bertman wrote: | Discussion from 2 years ago when this was new: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28434012 | 2Gkashmiri wrote: | 2 years ago matrix did not have voice rooms. Now we have video | rooms. | | How far stuff moves forward in short time. | alecnotthompson wrote: | 100 years ago, I was not born. Now, I am born. How things | happen in arbitrary periods of time. | arghwhat wrote: | > short time | | 1/40th of an average human life isn't really that short. | That's 400-700 calendar work days depending on your work | ethitcs, possibly thousands of man days. | | That's an eternity gone in the blink of an eye, not a short | time. | | Life is what is short. :( | colinsane wrote: | the first COTS videophones appeared > 50 years ago (though | very expensive). either that adds to your existential angst | or now you can frame this as a leap forward: "50 years | without any widely deployed open source video-conferencing | stack and suddenly it was rolled out to millions of users | in the last 5% of that timeline with the majority of those | end users not having to go out of their way for it." | | it's up to you. | solarkraft wrote: | This is cool, but why another chat silo? We have Mattermost, | Zulip and most prominently Matrix, which all come with their own | big ecosystems already. Why duplicate the work? | | Also: How do voice channels work in this thing? I've been | thinking for approximately forever about making Jitsi meet more | flexible to support channels, but never got around to it (I've | done some basic ground work on it, in case anyone wants to pick | it up). | marginalia_nu wrote: | Competition is good though. | TobyTheDog123 wrote: | Different strokes for different folks. | | And by "strokes" I mean use-cases, design preferences, | integration needs, etc. | | Personally I'd use RevoltChat if they offered SSO/SAML/OpenID | support - I like the UX and the Discord-esque vibe as opposed | to the Slack-esque vibe the alternatives you listed carry. | nine_k wrote: | Why did people even create Mattermost, Zulip, and Matrix when | Jabber and IRC already had existed? | | "All progress depends on the unreasonable man." | pndy wrote: | Wasn't Mattermost turned recently into a paid service? | Animats wrote: | The next big worry is Github. Moving major open source projects | off Github is going to be difficult. But we probably will have to | go to architectures where there are multiple synchronized | repositories some time in the next few years. | melony wrote: | OneDev: https://github.com/theonedev/onedev | | Gogs: https://github.com/gogs/gogs | rapnie wrote: | https://forgejo.org (hosted on Codeberg running.. Forgejo) | omneity wrote: | I use OneDev in my homelab to host code, both mine and OSS | forks, and run CI jobs. I'm pretty happy with it, except for | the limited community/figuring things out on your own vibe to | it. | melony wrote: | The Java web framework (Apache Wicket) it uses is vintage, | about as old as Rails. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Wicket | salzig wrote: | No gitea? | | https://about.gitea.com/ | melony wrote: | The Gitea team is full of crypto shillers. | | https://blog.gitea.io/2022/10/a-message-from-lunny-on- | gitea-... | | Their founder claims to have invented Gogs (he was one of | the early committers) when the original author is another | engineer | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gitea | | > _Gitea was created by Lunny Xiao, who was also a founder | of the self-hosted Git service Gogs._ | | https://about.sourcegraph.com/blog/three-years-at- | sourcegrap... | | > _About the author Joe Chen is Software Engineer and | maintainer of the open source project Gogs, a painless | self-hosted Git service. You can chat with Joe on Twitter | @jc_unknwon or our community Discord_ | nannal wrote: | Isn't that how git is designed to be? | mholm wrote: | Projects on Github are more than git. Commits can move, but | issues, pull requests, role mappings, wikis, and Actions, are | all potentially impossible/difficult to migrate elsewhere. | jvolkman wrote: | I agree in general, but the wiki specifically is just | another git repository that you can clone. | | e.g. for a repo at mholm/myrepo git clone | https://github.com/mholm/myrepo.wiki | Animats wrote: | Git, yes. Github, no. Github has many Github-only features | such as "continuous integration". Those need to become | portable, so you can run your builds on AWS or Hurricane | Electric as desired. | | It's become dangerous for open source to rely on anyone who | can cut off your air supply. Look at the current flap over | Red Hat. | erinnh wrote: | Good thing that Gitea has/is worked/working on a compatible | Ci/CD pipeline. | | Not sure if it's 100% compatible yet, but that's their | goal. | armchairhacker wrote: | GitLab has many of Github's features including CI, no? | https://tomasvotruba.com/blog/how-can-we-use-github- | actions-.... Furthermore, GitLab can be self-hosted and the | CI can be configured to use your own VMs. | | My team does CI in gitlab, and many big organizations use | self-hosted instances GitLab like KDE and GNOME. | nrjames wrote: | We do the same with Gitlab -- self-hosted, using their | gitlabrunner as the CI agent. It's great! | dhalucario wrote: | Are custom client's allowed? How can I be sure this won't be sold | out of nowhere? | allknowingfrog wrote: | It took slightly longer than expected for me to track down an | explanation of their business model. I think it boils down to | "run cheap until we have one". | https://developers.revolt.chat/faq/monetisation | dingusdew wrote: | [dead] | spondylosaurus wrote: | > Last revision. 7th March 2022 | | They're running Docusaurus for docs but adding manual | timestamps instead of using the built-in showLastUpdateTime | variable... this hurts me. | JustBreath wrote: | Dunno if this is the case here, but there are use cases for | manual timestamps, for example when you want to differentiate | between metadata updates / formatting changes and content | updates/reviews. | db48x wrote: | What's with the terrible names? I'll never use a communication | product named "Discord", and "Revolt" is even worse. | BizarroLand wrote: | It's FOSS, so make your own variant and give it a better name. | nocsi wrote: | They need to make servers automatically publish onto the web. | It'll bridge that gap between Discord & Reddit wherein | discussions can be discoverable. Plus all of that can be indexed | and crawled | moojd wrote: | This is really nice. Just needs one click joining for voice | channels. This is an under-appreciated killer feature of discord | that slack missed when implementing huddles. The ability to | instantly hop in and out of voice channels is what keeps discord | from feeling like any other teleconferencing app. Any friction to | this makes it so I am less likely to just casually jump into a | call. | uoaei wrote: | It's like talking over cubicle walls vs scheduling conference | rooms. | solarkraft wrote: | It's crazy how collaboration solutions keep missing this. I | passionately hate "calls". You don't catch people with a lasso | to talk to them in real life. | heyoni wrote: | Lol! This is such a great analogy I might lasso some folks | just to tell them about it. | steanne wrote: | the very first time i went looking for a discord plugin, i was | looking for a way to block that after having entered too many | chat channels accidentally. it might be a killer OPTION. | pohuing wrote: | But you can do that | moojd wrote: | Nice! I tried but I must be missing something. Is it a | setting? Only way I can see to join voice is to click on the | channel and then click the voice button? | lucb1e wrote: | This was normal back in the days of IRC and Mumble. I should | try introducing mumble into our company, come to think of it. | It's a good reminder indeed, I hadn't considered the old gaming | toolkit we used as teenagers | sylware wrote: | Do they have a noscript/basic (x)html portal? | | Or a plain and simple C client? | staunton wrote: | > plain and simple C client? | | You mean native binary? Why? It is too slow? | kstrauser wrote: | How's this better than Matrix? | | (Not a leading question. I haven't used Discord/Matrix/etc. more | than a handful of times and don't know what I don't know.) | Nuzzerino wrote: | Matrix feels a bit monocultural for my taste. Perhaps Revolt | can do better, we'll see. | staunton wrote: | Can you explain what you mean? Is it due to the technology or | an accidental adoption pattern that's independent of the | technology? | pndy wrote: | IIRC it doesn't feature encryption and there's no pairing | devices via QR or emotes chain as in Element client. Last time | I played around Revolt it was very Discord-alike | muzzio wrote: | Does Matrix have the equivalent of voice chat rooms that | Discord has? I find as a user of Discord that being able to see | who's just hanging out is the killer feature there. (As are | things like game streaming and bots, ofc) | Arathorn wrote: | yes, albeit in beta in Element: https://element.io/blog/drop- | in-drop-out-chats-with-video-ro... | moojd wrote: | I saw this and got excited but no, this isn't discord voice | channels. This is an integrated jitsi meet call. It looks | like some sort of prototype has been merged to develop | though: | | https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/pull/21476 | prophesi wrote: | What do you mean it's not discord voice channels? Looking | at the screenshot[0] their Jitsi Meet integration is | identical, because discord voice channels are essentially | voice conference calls. | | [0] https://user- | images.githubusercontent.com/48614497/159062202... | dingusdew wrote: | [dead] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-06-22 23:00 UTC)