Initially, we can open a topic in delta-chat where users can post the official email links of software development communities.
This can make delta-chat more popular among different development communities through popular communication as email.
Then, we can use the Discourse API to display a public list of official email links in delta-chat-android.
Going to the distant future (idea 2)
Maybe delta-chat-android has the possibility to be an e-mail and Discourse client.
Most development communities have email servers or forums like Discourse. In this sense, I imagine an approximation of an email client and Discourse.
In most cases, we want to communicate with several people either by email, social media or forums like discourse. Having software that is an email client and forum discourse is something interesting to think about.
idea(3): If it’s interesting, we can use the free-stuff-dev public API: https://freestuff.dev/stuff/index.json to receive links from development communities that still use the mailing list. But I would need to know what people think of this possible solution.
idea(4): we can query awesome-readmes that have public maillisting links from development communities.
idea(5): another possibility would be to have an awesome readme on delta-chat-github to list mailing lists.
Sounds great, and actually long time suggestion of my person, good householder. Earlier tried to point out the gains of using email to access forums in regard of simple-machine forum.
(at least also as way to do not let forums die out but seek ways to connect them.)
My person can just share ideas, not much it-skills or any other common means.
If good householder likes to experiment, maybe forum.sangham.net might be a way. Yet it’s all not really worldly dedicated there. Placeumaster Moritz might have joy to join, but not sure off course.
Two further challenges are to gain an email account when register in forum (to become independent from worldly providers) in easy ways. And to de-complicate register without taking the services of common net-work provider (people are used to just click and fb, google… would manage and look after)
(personaly my person doesn’t trust discourse much, running to much in the back-ground - AI-justice)
In my humble opinion we should focus on having contact with software development communities (plugins, IDE, graphical environments, programming languages etc).
If people want a specific forum, they should include it themselves. When I say “If people want a specific forum, they should include it themselves.”, that means it shouldn’t be posted on the forum but shared via email. I think about this idea, because it should be the responsibility of those who share certain “links personally” vs public “official delta-chat links”.
Maybe “this avoids any legal problem”, in theory one thing would be the tool and another thing is the use of the tool. I say “This avoids any legal problems” but I’m not a lawyer or judge or prosecutor- but I think there is or should be a difference between different responsibilities of those who produce an open tool and those who use the open tool.
Also, my desire would be to contribute with open software, so I would only like links from software development communities and not other links outside this scope.
Generally, public indexes I imagine should contain links to development communities. because generally in these links there is a certain moderation of content, rules of conduct, in addition it is very likely that there is credibility, auditability in the information.
I don’t think it would be possible to check all the links, but generally links from the software development community kind of check it out.
Generally, it is common for a web developer or backend, frontend etc to work on one or more open source, closed, public or free/libre projects. Therefore, I think it would be more valid to have software development only links to avoid having to evaluate the available links individually. So, as I said earlier, the developers themselves often have links to the development community which can make it easier to find and also audit the official or most recently verified links.
One issue that concerns me is who is going to check these links and who is going to post? Can this idea be done or accepted?
I believe that initially, we have to have the opinion of the delta-chat forum administrators to verify if this idea can be accepted or not. Would this idea be interesting to add or not?
Another problem, as I said earlier, there are already links that are shared by email, so in that sense it would not be new to have public indexes. There are things like “alternative-to” or “producthunt”, which talk about software alternatives and internet forums. In that sense, why have public indexes for public conversations if there are already sites that do this?
My person wouldn’t feel well to give anything for “all purpose” and “common”, wouldn’t dwell well and sleep well in providing “weapons”.
Many might be already touch to effects of “open” and “common”.
But that shouldn’t disturb your ideas, or limit them. It’s surely better, as already started right at the beginning, to relay on own means: why not using delta chat instead of git and discourse… It’s less inspiring if communication actually requires all others either.
I partially agree with this idea, but many forums have already migrated to Discourse, so being against Discourse in my opinion makes no sense. However, this is interesting to think about, in forums that still only use maillists. So, in this second case, it would be interesting to have a web index of public chats via mailing list.
Not really, good householder. Anonymous is never a good way, instead opening toward clear and honst relations, open to join and leave, knowing purpose of sacrifices as well the receivers well. Others is just denying responsibility of own deeds and hoping machines or other might fix ones mistakes and their effects.
But again, the topic was surely thought for ideas as. good householders. So just some encouragement to let foolish pseudo-liberality aside to find real motivation: which requires an object worthy of sacrifices.
Simply trying, good Allon. (It’s lesser a matter of the means as the old merits and conducts of a Brahma providing a world/womb for others to become. AN 4.32: Sangaha Sutta — The Bonds of Fellowship ) Atma is sure that the main Brahmas here surely apprentice broad infos under possible co-Devas.