Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

blog.zulip.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 126 posts

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#81

Post by tabbott »

hiisukun wrote: post #80
tabbott wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We support this, it's just enough of a corner case that it's not well documented. If you don't care about missed-message emails, you can install the Docker image (easiest to setup when offline), and then use https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/production/authentica... with an Apache .htaccess file as the thing that sets REMOTE_USER. Send a message in "#production help" in chat.zulip.org if you have trouble figurin…

Well, that's a great reply. Having read quickly through the docs, I think in particular the "Life of an Apache-based SSO login attempt" had enough information to clarify the process for me - until then I wasn't as sure. I don't think I would have located this option while filtering for "works without email, and I'm okay missing messages". If it was present a year ago I definitely didn't. Very glad it's a supported co…

Yeah, the front-page documentation focuses pretty heavily on "you should setup email" because it helps folks in a normal environment successfully setup Zulip quickly and reliably. I'm not sure whether this use case is common enough that we should put it in the front-page docs, but possibly we should write something that Google will find...

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#82

Post by meritt »

sien wrote: post #42
woolvalley wrote: post #27

How does it compare to mattermost?

Exactly. We're looking at paying for Slack and mattermost seems to offer most of what Slack does and is something that would be pretty easy to run. It's slick. Well documented and installs nicely in a container. Has anyone here used Mattermost? https://mattermost.com/

We've been using Mattermost (I have not used Zulip but it looks superb) for about a year. The UI/UX of the desktop and mobile apps is a bit kludgy but functionally it was a breeze to setup, runs on a very low-cost instance, and has had 100% uptime. And most importantly, we're in control of our data unlike cloud-only offerings.

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#83

Post by menacingly »

mikewhy wrote: post #65
paxy wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is a basic database, cache and queue too much?

It's not, but couldn't Redis do what Memcached and RabbitMQ are doing?

I could see an argument that Memcached is redundant, but it would definitely make sense to me to throw in a queue with some richer queueyness for a chat app

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#85

Post by bj0 »

tabbott wrote: post #81
hiisukun wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's a great reply. Having read quickly through the docs, I think in particular the "Life of an Apache-based SSO login attempt" had enough information to clarify the process for me - until then I wasn't as sure. I don't think I would have located this option while filtering for "works without email, and I'm okay missing messages". If it was present a year ago I definitely didn't. Very glad it's a supported co…

Yeah, the front-page documentation focuses pretty heavily on "you should setup email" because it helps folks in a normal environment successfully setup Zulip quickly and reliably. I'm not sure whether this use case is common enough that we should put it in the front-page docs, but possibly we should write something that Google will find...

I looked at Zulip vs Mattermost several months ago and, if I recall correctly, this was one of the primary reasons I went with Mattermost. I just wanted something I could spin up in docker on a vps without having to setup anything else (like an email server). Mattermost lets you generate "invite links" that you can just paste in a chat or text message.

The other really neat feature was having multiple "teams" on a single server.

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#86

Post by tabbott »

Nux wrote: post #84

We looked at it, wanted to like it, but for self-hosted there were problems with app notifications, something that plagues most self-hosted hipchat replacements (except for xmpp).

When did you look? https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/production/mobile-pus... has been available for over a year, so self-hosted has the same notifications experience as Zulip Cloud.

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#87

Post by akshayn »

As I commented here [1], one of my biggest issues with Zulip is that the mobile apps don't have a "jump to most recent" feature, and whenever I open the app I have to manually scroll past hours (or days or weeks, since I dislike opening the app so much) of old conversations.

Has this been fixed/improved?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17623592

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#89

Post by Aeolun »

shin_lao wrote: post #53

We are heavy Slack users. We tried Zulip. No one in the team liked the ergonomics of Zulip and how difficult it was to integrate. Just for threaded discussions we felt the switch was not worth it. It didn't stick and we stayed in Slack.

Might want to look at https://twist.com/home

It seems a bit like a slakey zulip to me, though I haven’t had opportunity to use it yet.

Re: Zulip Server 1.9: HipChat import and much more

#90

Post by tabbott »

beachy wrote: post #74

I love Zulip and wish it the best. But this comment on the zuplipchat web site https://zulipchat.com/security/ feels like a pretty gross generalisation and detracts from Zulip's vibe IMO: > With many SaaS providers, essentially all engineers have direct shell access to production servers storing user data. Zulip Cloud is different: only a small handful of security-trained engineers have access to production servers o…

Yikes, I'm not sure how "essentially all" ever got in there; it should have been "the majority of". And even with that edit, our practice is, where possible, to cite sources, and while there's a lot of anecdotal data on this topic, there aren't great published sources for this topic. So whether or not it's shockingly common for companies to have dozens or hundreds of people with shell access to production, we've removed the commentary on what other organizations do here, and just explain our practices.

I really appreciate the feedback!

Post reply on HN