[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [oniro-wg] Towards an Oniro chat service: channels structure proposal
|
Hello Marta,
On Thursday, 12 January 2023 12:59:12 CET Marta Rybczynska wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 5:19 PM Agustín Benito Bethencourt <
>
> agustin.benito@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > ## Background
> >
> > Eclipse Foundation IT is working on implementing an Oniro chat service
> > based on Matrix[1], as described in the IT Infrastructure and Services
> > Implementation and Migration Plan v1.1.0[2].
>
> Hello all,
> My comments to the proposal:
> 1. I like the idea of starting with a limited number of channels. Will they
> be done as two rooms in one workspace or two completely separate rooms?
Currently two rooms in a single "space". We are assuming that different WGs/
projects will have different spaces. This assumption will need to be confirmed
though.
> 2. The request of having an Eclipse account is not needed in my opinion. As
> said in other messages, this is not what people expect with Matrix. If this
> is to make sure people follow the rules, a banner like "By posting in this
> channel you agree to abide the code of conduct, and the IP policy" would be
> acceptable?
I partly answered this point in my previous mail, where I rectify my initial
statement.
The truth is that we have decided to provide the service to Oniro while in
parallel we sort out how to conceal in detail and in a sustainable way the
implementation, our processes/frameworks with the usage of the service. We do
not have all the answers at this point which is why we take this
implementation as a starting point and why I am insisting that things might
change.
From past experiences with Matrix, the conversations at process and legal
level might depend on "how the service is intended to be used". This intended
usage plus costs and effort associated to running/supporting the service is
part of what we need to learn about at Oniro before rolling it out across the
entire EF.
> 3. This is not clearly said if channels will be archived or not.
Short answer....I haven't because I do not know at this point. It is WIP.
Let me clarify a bit.
Right now (staging instance) we are not properly archiving the information.
The term "properly" is very important here.
1.- We will be working soon on an implementation that should meet our legal
and IP framework (Privacy Policy...which meets GDPR, obviously) in analogous
ways we use in other services.
BTW, it will be interesting for me to see how do we get explicit consent from
people with no EF account... if we need/have to.
2.- Archiving might mean additional costs. We will need to evaluate those
costs and the corresponding support effort.
Let me put an example... will we allow files transfer/storage? If yes, how
big? If yes, for how long?
I prefer to not guess here and let the experiments "in production" speak for
themselves before making any statement.
>
> Kind regards,
> Marta
Best Regards
--
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Oniro Program Manager | Eclipse Foundation
Eclipse Foundation: The Community for Open Innovation and Collaboration
