Rocket.chat
-
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
5.) How does this compare to just the free version of slack?
I've not used the free Slack, but I think that it is pretty limited.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
3.) Can a single install host multiple tenants
I've not tested this but you normally would put it behind an Nginx proxy which would make that trivial.
How does this make it multi tenant?
-
Could you deploy each customer as a "team" with there own chat rooms, then see all as a higher level admin?
And in this way members from multiple teams could also be in a shared chat room across organizations?
-
@dashrender said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
3.) Can a single install host multiple tenants
I've not tested this but you normally would put it behind an Nginx proxy which would make that trivial.
How does this make it multi tenant?
You can run an instance for each tenant on one system. One database server, one proxy, unlimited tenants.
-
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
Could you deploy each customer as a "team" with there own chat rooms, then see all as a higher level admin?
And in this way members from multiple teams could also be in a shared chat room across organizations?
Yes.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
Could you deploy each customer as a "team" with there own chat rooms, then see all as a higher level admin?
And in this way members from multiple teams could also be in a shared chat room across organizations?
Yes.
Where is this feature? When I was evaluating Rocket.Chat vs Mattermost, the one advantage that Mattermost had was that it supported Teams. I've never found the Team feature for Rocket.Chat. It supports multiple channels but not teams as far as I know.
Someone please prove me wrong as Mattermost has 1 (in my opinion) fatal flaw that might force me to reevaluate Rocket.Chat.
Edited for spelling.
-
@nashbrydges said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
Could you deploy each customer as a "team" with there own chat rooms, then see all as a higher level admin?
And in this way members from multiple teams could also be in a shared chat room across organizations?
Yes.
Where is this feature? When I was evaluating Rocket.Chat vs Mattermost, the one advantage that Mattermost had was that it supported Teams. I've never found the Team feature for Rocket.Chat. It supports multiple channels but not teams as far as I know.
Someone please prove me wrong as Mattermost has 1 (in my opinion) fatal flaw that might force me to reevaluate Rocket.Chat.
Edited for spelling.
What is the Mattermost flaw out of curiosity?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
5.) How does this compare to just the free version of slack?
I've not used the free Slack, but I think that it is pretty limited.
Even with all companies used paid version apparently you can not invite a user to your chat room, or create a shared chat room. I believe this should be a basic free feature.
You have to create two accounts and switch back and forth to see different chat rooms, or pay for another service like sameroom.io to get that going.
It would be easier and free to use Discord at least for basic chat. I know there is a lot of automation in slack.
-
@coliver Mattermost only supports "soft deletes" so if a message is created and a file uploaded to the message for example, and the message is subsequently deleted, neither the actual message nor the file are actually removed from the server. This could make for an ever increasing need for space on the server.
-
@nashbrydges said in Rocket.chat:
@coliver Mattermost only supports "soft deletes" so if a message is created and a file uploaded to the message for example, and the message is subsequently deleted, neither the actual message nor the file are actually removed from the server. This could make for an ever increasing need for space on the server.
Interesting.
-
@coliver I couldn't confirm that Rocket.Chat also suffers from this same flaw but the fact that I couldn't find a "Team" functionality with Rocket.Chat immediately killed it for me so I didn't bother looking any further.
Having tested both, if Rocket.Chat supports Teams, I would prefer that over Mattermost (provided it doesn't also suffer from the same flaw).
-
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@dashrender said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
3.) Can a single install host multiple tenants
I've not tested this but you normally would put it behind an Nginx proxy which would make that trivial.
How does this make it multi tenant?
You can run an instance for each tenant on one system. One database server, one proxy, unlimited tenants.
That is not multi tenant.
-
@jaredbusch said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@dashrender said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
3.) Can a single install host multiple tenants
I've not tested this but you normally would put it behind an Nginx proxy which would make that trivial.
How does this make it multi tenant?
You can run an instance for each tenant on one system. One database server, one proxy, unlimited tenants.
That is not multi tenant.
I didn't call it multi-tenant. I explained how it could be used to answer #3 and Dashrender called that multitenant.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@jaredbusch said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@dashrender said in Rocket.chat:
@scottalanmiller said in Rocket.chat:
@bigbear said in Rocket.chat:
3.) Can a single install host multiple tenants
I've not tested this but you normally would put it behind an Nginx proxy which would make that trivial.
How does this make it multi tenant?
You can run an instance for each tenant on one system. One database server, one proxy, unlimited tenants.
That is not multi tenant.
I didn't call it multi-tenant. I explained how it could be used to answer #3 and Dashrender called that multitenant.
You specifically replied to a question about multiple tenants. You made no attempt to say your recommendation was not multi tenant.
