dendrite VS Synapse

Matrix already has key-based identity in the works at https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/keg... (and implemented in Dendrite at https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3A...). Matrix is set up to let folks go wild and change fundamentals like this; basically every Matrix Spec Change (MSC) is a small fork, which then gets merged into the main spec if it can be proven to work well in the wild.

I really hope that Dendrite is getting more traction and maybe there's an OIDC solution for Matrix one day.

Yes there is an official helm chart. https://github.com/matrix-org/dendrite/releases/tag/helm-dendrite-0.11.2

This is what the Matrix team is developing Dendrite for. To have a feature-complete yet small server software. But it's still in beta.

Pinecone, which is an experimental overlay routing protocol used by P2P Matrix. It and Dendrite are extremely important to P2P Matrix.

So I want to setup an instance of Dendrite, a matrix home server. I have a docker-compose set, the yaml file in the correct directory, but I do not understand how to generate the key files. the dockerhub states that I should use this:

Dendrite, meanwhile, can be found here. They say it's in beta. I think it's a late Alpha. Dendrite's primary mode is "Monolith"; this will have many of the same scalability/balancing options that Synapse does. However the true benefit to Dendrite as I see it is the "polylith" mode where workers can swap around which worker is the master without any interruption of service. I do not think that Dendrite polylith works yet, but I might be wrong. I'll be looking at running it on a test server in January to see if it's time to upgrade from Synapse (and time to invest in 4-6 SBCs to keep three here and send 3 to 3 of my buddies to make my Matrix even more reliable).

What are you thinking of here? Synapse has supported purging room history since 2016: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/pull/911, and configurable data retention since 2019: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/pull/5815.

Meanwhile, Matrix has never needed the full room history to be synchronised - when a server joins a room, it typically only grabs the last 20 messages. (It does needs to grab all the key-value state about the room, although these days that happens gradually in the background).

If you're wondering why Matrix implementations are often greedy on disk space, it's because they typically cache the key-value state aggressively (storing a snapshot of it for the room on a regular basis). However, that's just an implementation quirk; folks could absolutely come up with fancier datastructures to store it more efficiently; it's just not got to the top of anyone's todo list yet - things like performance and UX are considered much more important than disk usage right now.

some context re the Matrix isses, long history apparently: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/14481#issuecomm...

Why not Matrix? Here's one reason: it has incredibly hard-to-debug edge cases, and plenty of bugs. One of my favourites is the one where people are kicked out of your room at random, which was reported a year ago[0]. It wasn't fixed, however, because the head of the Matrix foundation (Matthew) presumably didn't like the issue being posted on Twitter.

This is honestly really disappointing behaviour from a platform owner.

[0]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/14481

> That doesn't make this situation any less bad to the rest of the community.

How is the community suffering here? Let's say Element adds a bunch of baller stuff to their versions over the next few months and then closes the source. Can't the community just fork the last AGPL version? You might say, "well then no one can take the AGPL fork and make their own closed-source business", but do you want them to? Even if you do, they still can with the existing Apache-licensed version, just like Element is doing right now.

You're arguing that Element will lose a lot of contributions, but TFA points out that despite being super open, the vast majority of contributions are still made by Element employees (which seems to be true [0]). It's not the case that Element is looking to monetize the (small) contributions of others, it is the case that others are looking to monetize the (huge) contributions of Element.

And besides, aren't the MSCs the core of Matrix? It's already super possible to build your own compliant client and server.

The situation is that Element needs money to keep developing the ecosystem. It would be cool if there were a big network of donors and contributions, but there isn't. You're essentially saying, "that's fine, go out of business then, and the community will keep developing the ecosystem", but that's not happening now, and it can still happen anyway with the Apache-licensed versions, which again people can still contribute to.

[0]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/graphs/contributors