I am starting a new thread on the video chat issue since it was posted in a thread on menus.
Jonhk in the other thread stated:
Google have just made their Video conferencing tool free, obviously to compete with Zoom. This is my ten cents worth for what it's worth:
Running a commercially orientated video chat from your own server could be very costly. No problems with one-on-one and maybe small groups with Cheetah, but if you want anything more , it would be best to use one of the above offerings.
Although the Swiss Army Knife is a handy and universal tool, none of its features are as good as tools dedicated to a single task. Te Core of Cheetah should be the pouch, the components making up the knife should be modules, because not everyone needs a cork screw or pig stabber these days.
I am working on a project that needs group video chats. Deano is working on a replacement for the chat room with video chat ability but I need to have this project completed quickly; it was suppose to be completed two weeks ago but the video chat part is holding up getting the site live. What I have discovered is that there are applications out there that incorporate jitsi. Normally jitsi requires you to create the room and then email or text out the link to the video conference. What the solutions I have found are doing are creating the link through a single click and posting it to the room for anyone to use; and of course one can create private rooms. The flow is as a user I create a private chat room; I create the jitsi link by clicking on an icon that automatically posts the link to the room, then I invite those I want to chat with to the room; this is all done within the social network platform with only members having access.
Running a commercially oriented video chat from your own server is no more costly than paying for the server to handle the load. Plus with webRTC doing a one to one then the load is on the user, not your server. Setting up a one to many is different. The problem that I have with third parties being involved is that they have access to your members and data; hacks can occur on any servers and the bigger the fish, the more they will try to hack. Zoom routes through third party servers and they even went through China where China snooped because China wants to know everything they can about the US for their eventually world domination. The other problem is that you never know when the free stuff will stop or be shut down. Nothing is really free. Jitsi meet involves servers that someone is paying for by some means. Facebook appears free on the surface but they are selling your data. Google is the same. Google is bad about shutting things down; Google +, Google Hangouts, Google Voice that you can no longer connect a pbx to the server. Google is not this big kind-hearted soul; if they are going to offer a service, they are hoping for some return; if they don't see that return, they will shut it down.
I agree that not everything should be in the core and that some things should be left up to third party developers. At the same time, the core module offerings have to be attractive as well in order to get people to sign on and pay licensing fees. Deano has to make a living off of Cheetah in order for him to be able to continue development. I believe that video chat; even if it is not group video conferencing, is important as a means to draw in users. I am working on video conferencing using two open source projects; the video conferencing part is jitsi. Yes, it does mean installing the jitsi server on the server itself and not using jitsi meet as privacy and security are important in this project.