Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I tried an earlier version of a tox client. At that time, there were at least two competing clients that looked the same and did the same things. Is the tox civil war over yet?



But you realize that's like saying "Well, I tried IRC but there are dozens of competing clients that all do the same thing."

The Tox protocol is really the core tool. As long as the protocol is well-defined and maintained, I think developers should be free to make whichever clients that they want.

I used tox ages ago, and I used the Blight client or whatever it was called, and I liked it pretty well.

I think a bigger issue is convincing people to use it in small groups. My whole team is just fine using Mattermost/Hipchat/IRC and the majority of them don't see the need for something like this.


In this case, it's not like saying anything about IRC chat clients or Hipchat or whatever your team uses or develops. The clients really did look and behave the same. There was so much overlap between them. Not exaggerating this point.


I had a similar experience and it seemed like they were both being developed by the same core group(s) dividing their time between both (again, my perception) which was confusing as they were very similar.


I think it'd be nice if the tox.chat domain would link to just one tox client implementation in the downloads section.


The preliminary plan is to deliver a high quality implementation of the Tox protocol and then deliver a high quality client. I personally don't have time to do both, and the team has very limited resources. The most actively developed client is currently qTox.


You did an incredible job, ignore all this trashing.


I'm not trashing or at least wasn't intending to. I see how it could have been interpreted in that way, though.


Looks like no, there's uTox and Toxic - can't get Toxic to run.... so maybe?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: