* Package name : jitsi-meet Upstream Author : Jitsi Team <dev@jitsi.org> * URL : https://jitsi.org/meet * License : MIT Programming Lang: JavaScript Description : WebRTC JavaScript application that uses Jitsi Videobridge to provide high quality, scalable video conferences. Jitsi Meet is an OpenSource (MIT) WebRTC JavaScript application that uses Jitsi Videobridge to provide high quality, scalable video conferences. Jitsi Meet allows for very efficient collaboration. It allows users to stream their desktop or only some windows. It also shared document editing with Etherpad and remote presentations with Prezi.
retitle 760485 RFP: jitsi-meet -- WebRTC JavaScript application that uses Jitsi Videobridge to provide high quality, scalable video conferences. noowner 760485 tag 760485 - pending thanks Hi, A long time ago, you expressed interest in packaging jitsi-meet. Unfortunately, it seems that it did not happen. In Debian, we try not to keep ITP bugs open for a too long time, as it might cause other prospective maintainers to refrain from packaging the software. This is an automatic email to change the status of jitsi-meet from ITP (Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug hasn't seen any activity during the last 12 months. If you are still interested in packaging jitsi-meet, please send a mail to <control@bugs.debian.org> with: retitle 760485 ITP: jitsi-meet -- WebRTC JavaScript application that uses Jitsi Videobridge to provide high quality, scalable video conferences. owner 760485 ! thanks It is also a good idea to document your progress on this ITP from time to time, by mailing <760485@bugs.debian.org>. If you need guidance on how to package this software, please reply to this email, and/or contact the debian-mentors@lists.debian.org mailing list. Thank you for your interest in Debian,
Hi! I have used Jitsi quite a lot lately, and found that it has matured a lot. I would love to have a good install on my server, and therefore I'm just bumping this to hear if there is some progress on this. Kjetil
Hi. As user I'm interested in having Jitsi Meet available in FreedomBox. Since it is a pure Debian blend we need an official Debian package. So I'm considering to step forward and take over it. But 1) I've never ever packaged any Debian package. 2) According to this bug, previous attempts have failed, so I guess there are reasons for that. So, any guidance would be welcome. I've seen that upstream already provides a .deb file. I guess it needs further debianisation to be accepted in the archive. I plan to: - Review some introductory videos and documentation on Debian packaging that I read/watched ago and need a second check. - Take a look at other installation traces (Yunohost installs it on Debian and I want to check how they do it, and there's a number of hot to posts out there). - Then take the upstream package itself and try to identify the roadblocks. - Document them before I try to solve them, so that if I bun out someone can take over and not have to start all over again. I'm responding to both the bug tracker and the mentors list. Is the list for mentors and mentored pupils ment for pupill support or Is it just mentors-only for coordination? My underlying question is: Should I join that list? Thanks in advance
* Fioddor Superconcentrado: " Jitsi meet packaging" (Sun, 27 Sep 2020 12:10:17 +0200): Hi, At least the original owner of #760485 seems to be the same person that is currently active and in Uploaders at https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-meet/blob/master/debian/control Best will be to ask him directly why he didn't push to get the packages into Debian main. I have added him on CC. This list is for responding to all kinds of packaging questions, probably best to subscribe. Cheers Mathias
I had the same interest and mailed Damencho around March and he mentioned about lack of resources to maintain jitsi in Debian as its a lot of work.
May I help you ? Mentoring or RFP / RFS with regards On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 6:57 PM Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all, Thanks for the interest in the project. There are a few concerns I have, first is that we do not have the resources to maintain this. The second one is that the project sometimes follows the pace of the browsers to do new releases. Which means a new version every 6 weeks. We had two or three occasions in the last few years where everyone needs to update due to a breaking change in the browsers, like a mandatory field being added in SDP, or the old bridge not supporting the new DTLS version. And because of the pace of how things evolve, we do not support old release doing backports. This means that if a package goes in stable it may happen to soon be unusable. And sometimes backporting a change is even not possible :) Like the DTLS change, the update was moving of using a complete re-write of the bridge ... new dependencies and totally new project ... And if someone chooses the path of doing the job we are talking about 150-200 dependent libraries, I'm not sure how many of those are already in Debian, I would guess not much ... This was the main problem when we did the Jitsi Desktop submission to the Debian repos, It took us, one person, fulltime for almost six months. Nowadays the video bridge had been rewritten and has fewer dependencies. I'm also not sure about the state of Kotlin, is it yet in the repos, cause it is one of the dependencies? Regards damencho
<snip> Not yet. :( https://bugs.debian.org/892842
* Damian Minkov: " Re: Jitsi meet packaging" (Sun, 27 Sep 2020 09:41:31 -0500): Hi Damian, Thanks a lot to give some precious insights in the packaging effort, it is a good thing to have it documented on this bug. It seems really to be a difficult task to provide a stable version with changing browser compatibility. Cheers Mathias
Ok. As expected, there are indeed reasons for the Jitsi-meet's absence. We shouldn't expect it to arrive soon. On the other hand Jitsi has called a lot of attention lately, and it is used in DebConf and Debian Social. I'm not saying it will be easy, but I think we're in a way better position in 2020 that we were a few years ago. On top of that, the amount of dependencies might be reducing and although Kotlin isn't there yet either, it is reported to be 'almost' there. And although Jitsi might be a fast-moving target for the moment, I guess most of the underlying libraries aren't. Libraries are usually useful in broader contexts than user-applications, so we might perhaps be able to pool resources with other users interested in different use-cases for the same libraries. Do you think it would make sense to start packaging these libraries first, in order to pave the way for a future adoption of Jitsi-meet? El dom., 27 sept. 2020 a las 16:41, Damian Minkov (<damencho@jitsi.org>) escribió:
Hi Fioddor, On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:36 AM Fioddor Superconcentrado <fioddor@gmail.com> wrote: Personally, I would love to see jitsi-meet being in the official repositories. Having the dependencies already available in the repo for sure will help when someone starts working on packaging the components. But I'm not sure whether having some libraries in the repo without anyone using them is considered ok, but as long as there are maintainers of those and updating them. Here I'm talking about the java/kotlin part of the things. About the web part, I'm not so familiar with the Debian way of doing the packaging, but I suppose it is the same methods, everything should be offline. I will add as attachments the current state of the union of dependencies of the main components. So this is jicofo and jitsi-videobridge on the java side and jitsi-meet and lib-jitsi-meet on the web part (just attaching the package-lock file for the web projects). I'm not doing that to discourage people :) but to inform them about the amount of work that is needed. Regards and thank you damencho
I've generated the Javascript Team's task list for jitsi-meet, there's still quite a few build-deps that are needed to start with. https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Tasks/jitsi-meet