Openfire: Excellent, free open source chat server

The ever-expanding world of chat clients and servers makes selecting a solution an exercise worthy of a trade study. In our search for the right instant messaging solution, we tried many that were too big and many that were too small. But we found one that was just right: an easily configured XMPP (aka Jabber) server that is compatible with the majority of today's key clients (Jabber, Momentum, Pidgin, and so on). It's also nice that this server -- Ignite Realtime's Openfire -- is open source and saved us money.
Openfire passed our test because of its usability and fairly wide range of configurable options. (We tested version 3.6.4 on Linux.) It comes with its own embedded database but can also connect directly to a MySQL, Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, PostgreSQL, or IBM DB2 database, as handled by a clean database connection setup wizard that can't be beat. The server configuration GUI is straightforward and does not require a high level of technical understanding, which makes for an ideal small-business solution. Short of forgetting to open the necessary ports in the firewall -- probably the most likely point of failure for an administrator -- it would be difficult to botch the installation.
-
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version
- 1929 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
GitLab Web IDE
| Record Terminal Activity For Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Server
At times system administrators and developers need to use many, complex and lengthy commands in order to perform a critical task. Most of the users will copy those commands and output generated by those respective commands in a text file for review or future reference. Of course, “history” feature of the shell will help you in getting the list of commands used in the past but it won’t help in getting the output generated for those commands.
|
Linux Kernel Maintainer Statistics
As part of preparing my last two talks at LCA on the kernel community, “Burning Down the Castle” and “Maintainers Don’t Scale”, I have looked into how the Kernel’s maintainer structure can be measured. One very interesting approach is looking at the pull request flows, for example done in the LWN article “How 4.4’s patches got to the mainline”. Note that in the linux kernel process, pull requests are only used to submit development from entire subsystems, not individual contributions. What I’m trying to work out here isn’t so much the overall patch flow, but focusing on how maintainers work, and how that’s different in different subsystems.
| Security: Updates, Trustjacking, Breach Detection
|
Recent comments
1 hour 6 min ago
1 hour 18 min ago
8 hours 10 min ago
1 day 10 hours ago
1 day 11 hours ago
1 day 16 hours ago
2 days 17 hours ago
3 days 23 hours ago
3 days 23 hours ago
4 days 11 hours ago