Matrix integration ux

[Stvad]

First - I love using matrix as a messaging backend as an idea here!
I have some thoughts on the UX of it

First - seeing this on an event page put me in the thoughts space of "ohh I can connect my existing Matrix account - amazing"

(and I actually started writing this ticket with that misconception. I think it'd be a great feature to have!)

But then I actually clicked the button and it brought me to the account creation page:

I think there a few things that are confusing abou it (e.g. there is a bunch of edit field that you can't actually edit)

But my main feedback here is that IMO if we're rolling special OpenMeet matrix accounts - there is no reason to expose that to users (right now you can't even change anything about your matrix reg). So I think the matrix account should just automatically be created when OpenMeet account is created and users should just see the chat window.

[Stvad]

Also, I'd hide all the system messages here:

[Stvad]

Also fore deleting messages - there should be a confirmation popup/dialog before actually deleting them

[tompscanlan]

I agree with all the the above. If you know how to better integrate with matrix so I don't need to do it this way... I'd love to know. I'm new to the ecosystem and didn't find a better way. 1000% would love to improve this, but I'm not sure how.

At some point, you ought to be able to use your own ID, but I'm not federated yet. You can use 3rd party clients with this account though, which is a way to get live updates from chats on your devices.

I'm moving low on the matrix issues. Lower priority for most users right now.

[Stvad]

I guess my main point/request was to create a Matrix account for the user in background without them having to do any manual steps for this. Is that complicated?

[tompscanlan]

I think this is as good as it gets, but I'd love a matrix expert to tell me I'm wrong and point out the error of my ways :) We have a few systems working together, and this account creation and consent flow is a manual process to get them aligned. If we get enough people interested in it, I'll go find the answers

…

On Friday, October 24th, 2025 at 9:53 PM, Vlad Sitalo ***@***.***> wrote: Stvad left a comment [(OpenMeet-Team/openmeet-platform#249)](#249 (comment)) I guess my main point/request was to create a Matrix account for the user in background without them having to do any manual steps for this. Is that complicated? — Reply to this email directly, [view it on GitHub](#249 (comment)), or [unsubscribe](https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2AEUKVHCY3KZALMPHSMNT3ZLJY3AVCNFSM6AAAAACKESAXASVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTINBVGQ2TONJSGI). You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[Stvad]

Lmk if you're generally not interested in more discussion on this rn and I'll stop posting 😛

I guess from your message - I infer it's non trivial to remove that manual confirmation step?

https://element-hq.github.io/synapse/latest/admin_api/user_admin_api.html#create-or-modify-account seems like an api that should afford for that, assuming you're running your own server?

But also with that constraint in mind, some thoughts on maybe making it better

• what if you're prompted to do setup during sign up/first login?
• or we can display messages for the user that haven't done the setup and only prompt setup when someone wants to post
• I'd at least update the copy of the message to something that more clearly say that it's a very simple one time setup/that users don't need to already have a matrix account

[tompscanlan]

It is non-trivial to remove both of the screens you see that are served by mas.openmeet.net. We're using Matrix Authentication Service (MAS), to allow users to log into their account using their OpenMeet credentials and any matrix client. The api that you reference won't work in our case because of this. We do run our own server, but using MAS, we don't have users local to the matrix server, they live in MAS, and are provided by OpenMeet. So, yes, with this constraint of needing to go through the initial user creation, and an occasional consent screen, how do we make it better. Also, we can't easily control the the UI of those screens. re your ideas (keep them coming) - I didn't want login to be very heavy, so I delayed setting up matrix until it is used the first time. I'm open to trying it following user creation, but it could be a difficult change and I'm not convinced creating it upfront is better. What would the ideal time be to setup the intial matrix account? - My messaging around most things is very bad :( I'm very open to trying a different "connecting to matrix" flow. I can get into more details as needed if you want to dissect and improve it. - I'll see what I can do about the messaging. Any specific wording you propose? Be aware that the encrypted rooms in private rooms are a incomplete and likely to be buggy.

[Stvad]

I see!

I think I'd got with option of displaying already existing conversation on the event (without requiring matrix setup, show a read-only view from a bot perspective).
And then instead of UI for new message display something like "one time configuration required to join the conversation" as a button/link.
Or even just display normal UI and if the user tries to post something - show a popup to do configurations (important to preserve a message they were trying to send in this case)

---

Also, I'd maybe make the e2ee encrypted rooms opt-in (checkbox in event creation settings?) at least while it's experimental.

[Stvad]

Oh, interestingly my integration with matrix setup somehow got reset.

Seeing this again, even though I've set it up before

[tompscanlan]

When getting a new matrix session, you must manually consent. The consent screen is served by matrix authentication service, which has a screen that looks very different from openmeet. I wanted something to warn the user that they are about to do something and not to freak out.

The ugly consent screen occasionally being a mandatory step is something I can't change easily, and this connection required button was my attempt at coping with that. Open to suggestions here on how to do better.

I'm still moving a bit slow on getting to the matrix issues, but they are important.

[Stvad]

Hrm having to go through a consent screen regularly making this a lot worse.

I still think displaying the content of the chat immediately without requiring any action (from bot perspective) would make thingsa lot better here.

Arguably that breaks the e2ee contract, but I think e2ee should be opt-in anyway (and then this becomes part of the tradeoff on deciding to enable it)

[Stvad]

fwiw I think getting matrix to some reasonable state should be more of a priority? It's very prominent on the event view right now and also very prominently under-developed 😅
which then generally reduces overall sense of polish and readiness

[tompscanlan]

Thanks for the candid feedback.

I think I'll take your input and disable the e2ee for the unlisted groups/events. The public chat is working for others, so that should relieve some pain. It might mean needing to re-create the group or event to get it working, but new things should be working after that.

Might still be a few days to get there, but I'll reorganize priorities.

[tompscanlan]

Today I'm making all new rooms public/unencrypted: OpenMeet-Team/openmeet-api#369