Browser compatibility seems to be a problem on some devices, so building DC with jitsi’s mobile sdk seems preferable.
1 Like
you keep attacking the devs, if you are not ok the way they work, nothing prevents you from forking the project and working the way you think it should be done, if it turns out your way is better, I will be the first in support you as I can, but they have the right to do what they consider good for their version of Delta Chat. So please, hate solve nothing, think about our final goal and what is best for Delta Chat, and elaborate in a constructive and respectful way, advice is good but you can’t force people to do things the way you think is correct, if in the end you think your way is the right way and it is not accepted, then a fork is the only way out.
Good week for you @all
adb
4 Likes
Didn’t you mention a roadmap, whereas the issues about video integration have been closed.
Thus the question simply comes up what roadmap you are referring to.
Maybe you just assumed something without a cause.
I agree - a video+call function would make delta chat perfect (in comparison to other apps).
as i just stumbled upon a project that may be in the pot for solving this - i’d like to add it to the conversation (and bring it back to topic):
As already mentioned on github Matrix offers a bridge - so this
- may give the option to use video and calls via matrix
- may connect to other messengers via the matrix network - which i personally do not see as competition - but extension (e.g. through other bridges delta chat users then can write to people using other messengers).
Some days ago i also heard about Matterbridge. Although this doesn’t seem to offer email bridging it may be worth to keep it in the back of the head.
As i already tried to play a little with Nextcloud Talk the big problem i see with that is: you have to have access to a turn-server to really be able to use it in real live scenarios. Which isn’t the case for most of the people - even if the host their own nextcloud (via a “normal” webhoster - where uploading or click-install some progams is about all you can do). So again a solution that isn’t really as available as it sounds when you first read about it.
The video solution should be as accessible as the email.
2 Likes
Matrix uses the jitsi SDK, and as every IPv4 peer-to-peer connection, it too requires a STUN or TURN mechanism if the NAT routers the peers are using make that necessary.
Well, the devs are already hosting this website here, so maybe it is generally possible to host a “turn-server”. Or simply use the Jitsi one.
Great proposal with meeting link, which preserve important option of DC – ubiquitous, you can have no Delta-chat and participate in communication.
1 Like
i just had a look at other messengers and how they solve it. While most hide the info that you need access to a turn server to use it properly (e.g. nextcloud, matrix) -i found rocketchat to be using jitsi meet - as proposed here.
An implantation similar to that may be an idea.
Cool, thanks for looking around.
I wonder whether Rocketchat and Jitsi have some agreement over the usage of the Jitsi server…
I hope I’m not too late to the party. Recently I noticed guys behind PeerTube (fully decentralized network for storing and sharing videos - pretty much like youtube, but without any central nor federated authority) want to implement real-time video conferencing capabilities.
What about Delta using their app/SDK? It sounds to me simpler than integrating e.g. Jitsi SDK which is dependent on at least one non-email server and thus not the best fit for Delta’s decentralization goals (btw. I love Jitsi and use it from around the world for some years already, but I don’t think it’s the best fit for Delta).
Btw. another benefit of PeerTube could be to overcome the ~25MByte attachment size limit by simply using PeerTube as storage. This is though not a well though out idea, so take it with bigger grain of salt.
Do you have some links to these peertube things?
nah i mean like a link to the blogpost/announcement/livestream/whatever that they are doing stuff with video calls/conferencing. 
P2P Livestreaming is quite nice, but not really usefull for video calling on its own.
For example: Its acceptable to have 1-4 minutes delay in livestreaming, which isn’t acceptable for video calls/
1 Like
Meta: @gerryfrancis you can omit the message footer/greeting if you want in this forum.
Thanks for the link, unfortunately there demo site seems to be down for me so I can’t test it.
Maybe its architecture could give us inspiration when planning it. but generally there is not much new stuff:
- they use a STUN server to help the peers to connect.
- whats new to me is the decentelization project they are using: https://gun.eco/, maybe that’s worth to look into
2 Likes
Ref. [WebRTC-related] developments in NC Talk:
Hopefully this is the right place for a suggestion:
I notice in the Settings|Advanced under Experimental Features there’s a place for adding a URL for the Video Chat Instance. Manually adding in the suggested value for Jitsi, https://meet.jit.si/$ROOM, seems to work pretty well (if all participants have the Jitsi app installed). This adds what looks to me like the last thing lacking for DC to be a drop-in replacement for WhatsApp or Signal (for me at least).
But manually typing in that URL is annoying and error-prone; I doubt I could guide non-technical family members through this from afar.
I’d like to suggest adding UX to add the Jitsi URL as a one-tap process; maybe three radio-buttons:
- Disabled
- Jitsi
- Other (and selecting this enables a text box for manual entry)
Even better, for me personally, would be if Jitsi were selected by default when the app is installed (that way, I can just ask my relatives and friends to install the app and put in their email details, and video calls will ‘just work’).
Thoughts?
2 Likes
hi @robertfromont,
first of all - welcome aboard!
indeed, the entering of the webrtc-server can be improved 
among your ideas, this is what came to some developers mind and what is discussed internally:
- allowing to right-tap or long-tap a videochat-invitation and having an option as “Use this setting for my own videochat invitations”
- allow to scan the setting from a qr-code
- using a setting that comes from the autoconfig.xml or from provider-db - so providers can define their defaults.
using a working default as meet.jit.si of course has strong benefits, however, is also discussed controversy internally wrt decentrality.