• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 20th, 2023

help-circle



  • I run a prosody server and have a couple of users who run Monal, and notifications work reliably for us!

    I made sure to follow the considerations for server admins and it’s been ok.

    Regarding the push service: unless you deploy your own version of the app, it’s not possible to self-host your own push service. The flow looks like this:

    XMPP server -> Monal pushserver -> Apple pushserver -> Device

    Apple only allows the developer of the app to send notifications to their push server. They enforce this by giving the app developer a key specific to their app.

    The linkage between XMPP server and Monal pushserver gets set up by Monal: when it connects to the XMPP server, it instructs it to send messages while it is offline to the Monal pushserver.



  • I use podget, which is a 248 kB bash script. I really like it, and think it will meet your requirements:

    • It’s designed to be called from cron
    • It lets you sort your podcasts into categories
    • It automatically organises the downloads into different directories based on these categories
    • It’s been around since 2005 and is still maintained

    From its description:

    Podget is a simple podcast aggregator optimized for running as a scheduled background job (i.e. cron). It features support for downloading podcasts from RSS & ATOM XML feeds, for sorting the files into folders & categories, for importing URLs from iTunes PCAST files & OPML lists automatic M3U & ASX playlist creation, and automatic cleanup of old files.

    It also features automatic UTF-16 conversion for podcasts hosted on MS Windows servers.



  • ambitiousslab@lemmy.mltoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I for one would love to throw money at Mozilla, or any alternative, that has experienced developers behind it, doesn’t have conflicts of interest and acts on behalf of its users. This is why I donate to Servo, Ladybird and Dillo too (I know one of these is not like the others 😄).

    I don’t think they’d reach their current levels of funding through donations, but it might be possible to get enough together to keep it on life support.

    I know this wouldn’t be perfect, but surely better than losing it completely.



  • The only way to get people to switch from Adobe is to wait for Adobe to make the life unbearable for their own customers

    Completely agree with this! The big opportunities to get mindshare will come completely out of the blue, and likely as a result of massive blunders on Adobe’s side.

    We never know when the blunders will come, we just have to be ready and provide the next best user experience so that the free software is the “obvious” place to switch to.

    As we saw from the twitter/reddit migrations, the fediverse did get a large amount of traction, but bluesky became the obvious alternative because its UI was basically the same.

    And that’s fine - the fediverse is it’s own thing and many people (myself included) don’t want “adoption at all costs” - but I think it’s worth pointing out that it does hinder adoption in these big moments.

    I have a lot of respect for free software projects that deliberately replicate the UI of an existing proprietary project. They make it so easy to recommend for people to switch when those moments come.

    What I have seen is that once people get a taste of free software that really easily solves their problem, it makes the benefits “real” to them and they start to look for other alternatives on their own.


  • ambitiousslab@lemmy.mltoTechnology@lemmy.worldOpen-Source is Just That
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I agree with parts about entitlement. The expectation of support and treatment of open source software as if it was proprietary is a real problem.

    But, the authour makes a similar mistake - they conflate open source software with source-available (proprietary) software. As an example, I strongly disagree with this part:

    When software is open-source, it is open-source, not necessarily free and open-source (FOSS), and even if it is FOSS, it might still have a restrictive licence. The code being available in and of itself does not give you a right to take it, modify it, or redistribute it.

    If you replace it with this version, I am happy:

    When software is source-available, it is source-available, not necessarily open source or free and open-source (FOSS). The code being distributed under a source available license does not give you a right to take it, modify it, or redistribute it.

    I think it’s really important that we keep a clear delineation between free/open source software on one side, and source-available (proprietary software) on the other.

    A lot of companies are trying to co-opt and blur the meaning of the term so they can say “seeing the source was always the point, none of the other freedoms mattered”, in order to sell you proprietary licenses.

    Open source gives you the right to take, modify and redistribute it. Source available does not. And that’s ok, just please don’t blur the terms together.

    even if it is FOSS, it might still have a restrictive license

    Likewise, this is definitionally untrue. The whole purpose of FOSS is to give you the four freedoms.


  • For services only I depend on, I have production-only. Since I can only inflict damage on myself, and can often work around problems.

    For the XMPP server my friends and family also depend on, I have a dedicated nonprod VPS. My services are driven by ansible playbooks, so I’ll tweak the playbook with whatever change I want to make works in nonprod, before running the same playbook against prod.

    Whenever there’s a new Debian Stable release, I’ll rebuild the servers completely, to try and prevent “drift” between the nonprod and prod versions (not that I change things often enough for this to become a big problem). This is also the big test of my backups, which so far haven’t been needed in a “real” emergency 🤞




  • I would love for such a fund to invest very liberally in these companies, on the condition that anything it funds must be free and open source - public money, public code! The only way to take down these giant US companies is to work together, and the most effective way to work together is to release everything in the open in such a way that anyone can build on top of it.

    If the money just gets funneled into these companies so they can build their own lock-in, the EU would be recreating the same dependency on a few small companies that happened in the US. It wouldn’t increase productivity in the long run, it would instead substitute dependency on a few US companies for a few EU companies.

    But, if they invest in open source software, it could spur innovation not only in the companies that are directly funded, but also thousands of other companies throughout the EU that would now have common infrastructure that they can build on top of.



  • I donate to Ladybird and Servo, and I hope they succeed. We need serious competition and a check on Mozilla (not to mention Chrome and Safari).

    That said, I’m sad that neither Ladybird or Servo are licensed under strong copyleft licenses. We need user-oriented browsers now more than ever, and strong copyleft enables that. I worry that, even if these engines are successful, they will be co-opted by proprietary browsers and eventually superseded by them.

    This happened before - both Chrome and Safari ultimately derive from KHTML, Konqueror’s browser engine. If KHTML had been licnesed under the GPL instead of the LGPL, Chrome and Safari (and not just their engines) may have been free software today. Or, at the very least, it would have been much more difficult for Apple and Google to get started.

    That said, I wish Ladybird the best. There donation = no influence policy is excellent, and I really, really hope they can stick to it in the long term.




  • I’d prefer having both analogue and digital options for things, but I’m fine with requiring technology, as long as open standards are used throughout. That is the only way to ensure equal and non-discriminatory access.

    You should never have to use any particular piece of software, or be forced to sign a terms of service, to go about your daily life. Requiring an app for everything only entrenches iOS and Android, and most apps really don’t cater well for people with disabilities or other requirements.

    Meanwhile, open standards allow a variety of software to be built that can cater for everyone’s needs.