|
|
|
|
|
by Andrew_nenakhov
1682 days ago
|
|
What you cite is not a conflict. It is a mild disagreement about the development of new features. A real conflict is when you have different entities with different implementations, and diverging views on how to develop the protocol, and the stake for the losing party is to abandon their investment in their existing implementation and starting over from scratch. However, I already have the answer on how you plan to deal with such conflicts, you've said it yourself [1]. I'll quote: > The idea on Matrix is that you say "Hi, I talk Matrix CS API 0.4" and be done with it - and you end up with much more social pressure to keep up to date with the current latest spec, because otherwise you are simply falling behind If we say it in a less courteous manner, "Once we introduce changes, your independent implementation will be cut off from our network, and if you'll need several more months to implement changes, well, tough luck". You see, I'm not saying Matrix is evil. It's a rather developed product, just like Mattermost or Flock. But a federated protocol it is not. Please stop advertising as such, and I'll have nothing to say about it. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19421978 |
|