By feature, do you mean "foss"? (Wondering if you're replying to the correct thread)
If so, then it's unfortunate I'm investigating this direction, it seems nessesary.
Otherwise feel free to let me know of a critical feature missing (if "foss" is not the feature you meant.)
No. When I type with "correct capitals", it's because I'm doing it from my phone. I otherwise generally might sound like chatgpt.
thanks!
im a developer im not much of an expert on licences of any kind. i created code and decided to open source it here: https://github.com/positive-intentions/chat . when i say the close source app is "based on" the open source code, i hope it doesnt undermine that it itself is a fully functional p2p messaging system (im of the opinion that all projects will always need refinement). anyone with issues about close-source code should take a look at the open-srouce version. its basically more functional but it seems too complex to maintain as open source andd thus this new project.
id like to offer the statics as a zipped folder. this is in the roadmap, but the code will be minified and obfuscated. about as opaque as possible for "source available". i dont know much on the matter, but id like to learn more about if this can be made into libre software. its hardly modifyable or studyable.
while i dont want you to "trust me bro", i am actively developing it and improving the functionality. so that static bundle will have to be build by the CI/CD and it will update along with the app. it goes without saying, the project is not mature enough to have things like security audits.
thanks! for your feedback there! ahh the connection bugs. unfortunately this is is one of the trickier bugs. im working towards fixing that asap. i have an idea of a fix, but im trying to avoid rewriting a core piece. have you tried closing the app on both devices and trying again (sorry, i know its a bit cliche).
if its not a secret, can you maybe tell me more about your LAN setup for me to set something up and try? i certainly aim for it to "just work".
I'm no expert on the matter of licences either. I made the open source code some bsd licence because some of the dependencies called for it.
I created some code and made some open source. I don't have to apply that to all my projects.
I mean to draw attention to the open source code in such a case.
If interested in how it works and to see code examples, this project is based on my beefier open-source code seen here: https://github.com/positive-intentions/chat
Thanks. I hope to get to a point where I can make the experience as seamless as workhole.
To compare solutions, a key details around providing my app as a webapp, is to avoid the requirement of a client. this opens up the set of compatible platforms.
(Note: it's a common request for me, so by popular demand, i will aim to provide binaries for the major platforms.)
For me, it's an achievement for it to be comparable to those tools. I aim to get to a similar feature set and make the user experience intuitive.
Just to be clear, my own open source code. Yes.
Strong title needed for strong claims.
Its based on open source code. https://github.com/positive-intentions/chat . I'd be happy for feedback on that too.
Webrtc would be able to outperform all other methods for transfer speed (useful for when sending larger files)
I'm sure there is a market for eople who want to transfer files. With a zero-installation, zero-registration, it should make it easy for people to get started.
Thanks!
https://www.reddit.com/r/cryptography/comments/1cint8h/what_are_your_thoughts_on_subtlecrypto_vs_wasm/
Tldr; I had that question before myself. It doesn't seem to introduce any improvement over WebCrypto API which itself should have gone through peer-review and auditing. ("Choose your browser wisely" could be considered the advice here.)
I'd like to still look into wasm for several other details of the project, but it seems the built-in browser cryptography functions are performant and generally pretty good if used correctly.