Tuesday, December 12, 2017
xsf@muc.xmpp.org
December
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
        1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
             
XSF Discussion | Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/ | Agenda https://trello.com/b/Dn6IQOu0/board-meetings

[00:01:17] *** zinid has joined the room
[00:01:57] *** sonny has left the room
[00:02:00] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:03:43] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[00:04:01] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:04:03] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[00:05:15] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[00:06:32] *** sonny has left the room
[00:06:35] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:07:10] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:07:11] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:07:57] *** uc has joined the room
[00:08:49] *** efrit has joined the room
[00:10:28] *** zinid has left the room
[00:11:16] *** sonny has left the room
[00:11:19] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:13:05] *** sonny has left the room
[00:13:08] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:14:32] *** sonny has left the room
[00:14:34] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:15:47] *** daniel has left the room
[00:15:56] *** daniel has joined the room
[00:16:16] *** jere has joined the room
[00:16:29] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:16:54] *** sonny has left the room
[00:16:57] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:18:57] *** zinid has joined the room
[00:19:01] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:19:28] *** Holger has left the room
[00:19:37] *** Holger shows as "online"
[00:20:27] *** sonny has left the room
[00:20:29] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:22:31] *** sonny has left the room
[00:22:34] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:23:59] *** sonny has left the room
[00:24:01] *** sonny shows as "online"
[00:26:22] *** sonny has left the room
[00:26:24] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:26:48] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:26:48] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[00:28:26] *** sonny has left the room
[00:28:29] *** uc has joined the room
[00:28:29] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:28:58] *** daniel has left the room
[00:29:01] *** daniel has joined the room
[00:29:06] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[00:29:38] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:29:38] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[00:29:49] *** arc has left the room
[00:29:50] *** arc has joined the room
[00:30:18] *** zinid has left the room
[00:30:28] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:30:52] *** sonny has left the room
[00:30:54] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:31:06] *** sonny has joined the room
[00:32:00] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[00:32:02] *** arc has left the room
[00:36:52] *** lumi has left the room
[00:38:06] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[00:38:07] *** arc has joined the room
[00:38:17] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:38:17] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:39:58] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[00:45:36] *** uc has joined the room
[00:49:57] *** Zash has left the room
[00:54:28] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:54:28] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[00:55:28] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[00:55:43] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:55:43] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[00:56:46] *** lskdjf has left the room
[00:56:46] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[01:02:33] *** uc has joined the room
[01:03:08] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[01:05:40] *** goffi has left the room
[01:07:20] *** Holger has left the room
[01:07:25] *** Holger shows as "online"
[01:13:10] *** lskdjf has left the room
[01:15:45] *** arc has left the room
[01:15:46] *** arc has joined the room
[01:21:02] *** arc has left the room
[01:21:04] *** Zash has joined the room
[01:23:47] *** arc has joined the room
[01:35:37] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[01:37:13] *** daniel has left the room
[01:37:17] *** daniel has joined the room
[01:44:20] *** daniel has left the room
[01:44:25] *** daniel has joined the room
[01:45:04] *** ThurahT shows as "away"
[01:45:04] *** ThurahT shows as "online"
[01:45:13] *** matlag has left the room
[01:45:33] *** zinid has joined the room
[01:48:28] *** Tobias has joined the room
[01:51:28] *** SamWhited has left the room
[01:51:35] *** zinid has left the room
[01:52:45] *** jjrh has left the room
[01:52:48] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[01:53:11] *** jjrh has left the room
[01:53:16] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[01:54:00] *** jjrh has left the room
[01:54:03] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[01:54:43] *** jjrh has left the room
[01:54:46] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[01:56:21] *** daniel has left the room
[01:56:27] *** daniel has joined the room
[01:58:47] *** jjrh has left the room
[01:58:51] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[01:59:04] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[02:00:15] *** Guus has left the room
[02:00:17] *** Guus has joined the room
[02:00:38] *** daniel has left the room
[02:00:46] *** daniel has joined the room
[02:01:13] *** daniel has left the room
[02:01:20] *** daniel has joined the room
[02:01:30] *** ThurahT shows as "away"
[02:01:30] *** ThurahT shows as "away"
[02:05:54] *** zinid has joined the room
[02:07:31] *** sonny shows as "online"
[02:11:29] *** jjrh has left the room
[02:11:37] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[02:12:30] *** Guus has left the room
[02:13:41] *** daniel has left the room
[02:13:45] *** daniel has joined the room
[02:20:17] *** zinid has left the room
[02:26:19] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[02:30:00] *** jjrh has left the room
[02:30:01] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[02:30:04] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[02:30:04] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[02:33:48] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[02:43:54] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[02:50:13] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[02:57:18] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[03:07:40] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[03:08:04] *** daniel has left the room
[03:08:35] *** daniel has joined the room
[03:12:43] *** Zash has left the room
[03:22:29] *** daniel has left the room
[03:22:32] *** daniel has joined the room
[03:27:17] *** Zash has joined the room
[03:30:46] *** efrit has left the room
[03:30:56] *** efrit has joined the room
[03:32:14] *** jere has left the room
[03:32:18] *** jere has joined the room
[03:32:43] *** daniel has left the room
[03:32:46] *** daniel has joined the room
[03:35:42] *** moparisthebest shows as "online"
[03:36:39] *** daniel has left the room
[03:36:42] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[03:36:43] *** daniel has joined the room
[03:40:10] *** zinid has joined the room
[03:40:51] *** daniel has left the room
[03:40:57] *** daniel has joined the room
[03:45:07] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[03:46:10] *** zinid has left the room
[03:55:11] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[03:56:57] *** daniel has left the room
[03:57:00] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:01:47] *** mrkiko has joined the room
[04:05:27] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[04:07:08] *** daniel has left the room
[04:07:13] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:07:45] *** daniel has left the room
[04:07:45] *** sonny shows as "online"
[04:07:47] *** sonny shows as "online"
[04:07:54] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:11:58] *** zinid has joined the room
[04:13:58] *** Kev has left the room
[04:16:30] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[04:17:53] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[04:18:27] *** daniel has left the room
[04:18:30] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:19:59] *** daniel has left the room
[04:20:06] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:20:16] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[04:22:47] *** zinid has left the room
[04:22:49] *** zinid has joined the room
[04:28:49] *** zinid has left the room
[04:43:22] *** daniel has left the room
[04:43:30] *** daniel has joined the room
[04:49:24] *** efrit has left the room
[04:51:43] *** matlag shows as "online"
[04:57:59] *** daniel has left the room
[04:58:00] *** daniel has joined the room
[05:00:48] *** SamWhited has left the room
[05:00:48] *** SamWhited has left the room
[05:07:58] *** daniel has left the room
[05:08:04] *** daniel has joined the room
[05:09:39] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[05:12:23] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[05:13:51] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[05:16:54] *** daniel has left the room
[05:18:05] *** daniel has joined the room
[05:18:35] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[05:24:36] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[05:24:45] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[05:27:13] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[05:27:17] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[05:34:09] *** SamWhited has left the room
[05:36:44] *** SamWhited has left the room
[05:36:44] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[05:41:27] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[05:41:49] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[05:55:30] *** zinid has joined the room
[05:55:37] *** Guus has joined the room
[05:56:03] *** uc has joined the room
[06:00:07] *** la|r|ma has left the room
[06:06:20] *** zinid has left the room
[06:06:21] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:07:02] *** arc has left the room
[06:07:03] *** arc has joined the room
[06:07:39] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:08:01] *** sonny shows as "online"
[06:09:41] *** SouL has left the room
[06:09:49] *** SouL shows as "online"
[06:10:56] *** arc has left the room
[06:10:57] *** arc has joined the room
[06:11:33] *** @Alacer has left the room
[06:11:36] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[06:13:34] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:14:29] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:17:04] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:18:35] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:21:28] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:22:21] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:25:35] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:25:50] *** sezuan shows as "online"
[06:25:57] *** daniel has left the room
[06:26:05] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:27:14] *** daniel has joined the room
[06:30:02] *** arc has left the room
[06:30:12] *** @Alacer has left the room
[06:30:15] *** arc has joined the room
[06:30:15] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[06:30:28] *** zinid has joined the room
[06:30:41] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:30:53] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[06:33:42] *** SouL has left the room
[06:33:46] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:34:40] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:36:41] *** arc has left the room
[06:36:42] *** arc has joined the room
[06:36:52] *** jmpman has joined the room
[06:38:22] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:39:43] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:44:16] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:45:09] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:46:30] *** @Alacer has left the room
[06:46:33] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[06:46:36] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[06:46:44] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:47:27] *** SouL shows as "online"
[06:48:11] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:49:05] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:51:09] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:51:15] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[06:51:28] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[06:52:23] *** Guus has left the room
[06:52:23] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[06:52:24] *** Guus has joined the room
[06:52:52] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:53:43] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:53:49] *** jonasw shows as "online"
[06:54:24] *** jonasw shows as "online"
[06:56:54] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:57:45] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[06:58:15] *** arc has left the room
[06:58:37] *** arc has joined the room
[07:00:35] *** daniel shows as "online"
[07:01:51] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:05:36] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:06:30] *** Guus has left the room
[07:07:17] *** sonny shows as "online"
[07:07:55] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:08:52] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:11:58] *** daniel has left the room
[07:12:05] *** daniel shows as "online"
[07:14:24] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:18:18] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:21:26] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:22:18] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:22:19] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[07:24:23] *** tim@boese-ban.de has joined the room
[07:25:46] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[07:26:05] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:26:13] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[07:26:36] *** @Alacer has left the room
[07:26:40] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[07:26:56] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:29:41] *** daniel has left the room
[07:29:52] *** daniel shows as "online"
[07:31:16] *** daniel has left the room
[07:31:37] *** Guus has joined the room
[07:33:05] *** arc has left the room
[07:33:06] *** arc has joined the room
[07:33:30] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:35:38] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:36:09] *** zinid shows as "online"
[07:36:13] *** sezuan has left the room
[07:36:25] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:36:36] *** daniel shows as "online"
[07:39:26] *** waqas has joined the room
[07:40:11] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:41:02] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:42:41] *** waqas has left the room
[07:43:57] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:44:21] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[07:44:47] *** arc has left the room
[07:44:49] *** arc has joined the room
[07:44:50] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:48:35] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:48:36] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[07:48:49] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[07:49:29] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:51:20] *** jonasw has left the room
[07:52:32] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:53:20] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:55:22] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "At Home"
[07:56:37] *** Guus has left the room
[07:56:39] *** Guus has joined the room
[07:57:05] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:57:16] *** zinid has left the room
[07:58:00] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[07:58:11] *** zinid shows as "online"
[07:58:36] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Nicht verfügbar wegen Untätigkeit seit mehr als 15 Minuten)"
[07:58:36] *** daniel has left the room
[07:59:33] *** arc has left the room
[07:59:34] *** arc has joined the room
[08:00:37] *** daniel shows as "online"
[08:01:04] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:01:59] *** daniel shows as "online"
[08:01:59] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:04:25] *** daniel has left the room
[08:04:32] *** daniel shows as "online"
[08:05:44] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:06:32] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:07:09] *** jcbrand has joined the room
[08:07:22] *** daniel has left the room
[08:07:29] *** daniel shows as "online"
[08:08:20] *** jonasw shows as "away"
[08:09:30] *** Guus has left the room
[08:10:19] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[08:10:34] *** daniel has left the room
[08:10:41] *** daniel shows as "online"
[08:11:28] *** Kev shows as "online"
[08:11:29] *** Kev shows as "online"
[08:12:03] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:12:56] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:15:20] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[08:15:21] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[08:18:33] *** Kev has left the room
[08:20:43] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[08:21:12] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:22:05] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:24:41] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:25:28] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:25:51] *** sonny shows as "online"
[08:25:52] *** sonny shows as "online"
[08:27:18] *** @Alacer has left the room
[08:27:22] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[08:29:14] *** andrey.g has joined the room
[08:30:15] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[08:30:15] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[08:35:15] *** Steve Kille has joined the room
[08:35:16] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "At Home"
[08:35:59] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[08:36:12] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[08:38:12] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[08:38:56] *** jonasw shows as "online"
[08:39:41] *** daniel has left the room
[08:42:22] *** andrey.g shows as "online"
[08:49:06] *** andrey.g shows as "online"
[08:51:25] *** daniel has left the room
[08:53:00] *** daniel has joined the room
[08:55:27] *** marc has joined the room
[08:55:55] *** sonny shows as "away"
[08:59:38] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[09:00:59] *** marc shows as "online"
[09:03:00] *** goffi has joined the room
[09:04:48] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[09:05:05] *** sonny shows as "online"
[09:09:11] *** @Alacer has left the room
[09:09:33] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[09:14:12] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[09:14:18] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[09:21:39] *** daniel shows as "online"
[09:25:54] *** Kev has left the room
[09:29:12] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[09:29:21] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[09:31:55] *** SouL has left the room
[09:32:15] *** SouL shows as "online"
[09:36:08] *** daniel has left the room
[09:39:16] *** Guus has joined the room
[09:41:23] *** sonny shows as "away"
[09:46:37] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[09:46:43] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[09:47:50] *** @Alacer has left the room
[09:50:29] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[09:52:13] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[09:53:22] *** daniel shows as "online"
[09:54:21] *** sonny shows as "online"
[09:56:01] *** zinid has left the room
[09:56:24] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[09:56:29] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[09:58:21] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[09:58:29] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[09:59:05] *** daniel has left the room
[09:59:10] *** daniel shows as "online"
[10:00:28] *** ralphm has left the room
[10:01:03] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "Hampton"
[10:02:16] *** sonny shows as "online"
[10:02:54] *** daniel has left the room
[10:03:00] *** daniel shows as "online"
[10:06:32] *** jonasw shows as "away"
[10:08:15] *** tux has joined the room
[10:08:21] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[10:16:33] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[10:18:44] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[10:21:27] *** daniel has left the room
[10:22:46] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[10:24:10] *** jere has joined the room
[10:28:08] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[10:30:46] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[10:30:46] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[10:31:34] *** Syndace has left the room
[10:31:37] *** Syndace has joined the room
[10:31:38] *** zinid has left the room
[10:31:42] *** zinid has joined the room
[10:39:15] *** zinid shows as "online"
[10:41:41] *** lumi has joined the room
[10:47:30] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[10:47:40] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[10:48:09] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[10:52:57] *** jonasw shows as "online"
[10:57:48] *** tux shows as "away" and his status message is "Nicht am PC"
[11:00:31] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[11:02:32] *** MattJ shows as "online"
[11:02:46] *** debacle has joined the room
[11:03:14] *** zinid has left the room
[11:04:16] *** zinid shows as "online"
[11:05:31] *** daniel has left the room
[11:06:04] *** daniel has joined the room
[11:08:14] *** Tobias shows as "away"
[11:11:32] *** efrit has joined the room
[11:16:48] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[11:18:16] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[11:24:23] *** Guus shows as "online"
[11:24:38] *** @Alacer has left the room
[11:25:58] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[11:28:16] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Nicht verfügbar wegen Untätigkeit seit mehr als 15 Minuten)"
[11:30:49] *** jere has left the room
[11:32:45] *** zinid has left the room
[11:32:53] *** jere has joined the room
[11:32:59] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "Hampton"
[11:35:04] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[11:36:38] *** blabla has joined the room
[11:40:03] *** jere has left the room
[11:40:10] *** jere has joined the room
[11:43:04] *** efrit has left the room
[11:44:14] *** zinid shows as "online"
[11:48:18] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[11:48:53] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[11:53:40] *** jere has left the room
[11:53:54] *** jere has joined the room
[11:54:35] *** efrit has joined the room
[11:58:18] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Nicht verfügbar wegen Untätigkeit seit mehr als 15 Minuten)"
[12:02:59] *** Guus has left the room
[12:03:00] *** Guus shows as "online"
[12:04:33] *** daniel has left the room
[12:04:37] *** daniel has joined the room
[12:05:35] *** jere has left the room
[12:05:43] *** jere has joined the room
[12:07:26] *** sonny shows as "away"
[12:12:08] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[12:15:30] *** Guus has left the room
[12:21:21] *** daniel shows as "online"
[12:24:07] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[12:24:19] *** zinid has left the room
[12:24:55] *** lumi shows as "online"
[12:27:18] *** jabberatdemo has joined the room
[12:30:08] *** Guus shows as "online"
[12:30:56] *** jabberatdemo has left the room
[12:34:42] *** zinid shows as "online"
[12:35:17] *** daniel has left the room
[12:36:15] *** daniel shows as "online"
[12:37:30] *** la|r|ma has joined the room
[12:39:15] *** la|r|ma has left the room
[12:39:25] *** la|r|ma has joined the room
[12:44:04] *** Guus has left the room
[12:44:05] *** Guus shows as "online"
[12:44:06] *** la|r|ma has left the room
[12:44:11] *** la|r|ma has joined the room
[12:49:17] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[12:54:39] *** Syndace has left the room
[12:54:43] *** Syndace has joined the room
[12:55:48] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "away" and his status message is " (Abwesend wegen Untätigkeit für mehr als 5 Minuten)"
[12:56:12] *** tim@boese-ban.de shows as "online"
[12:57:30] *** Guus has left the room
[13:04:09] *** lumi shows as "online"
[13:05:04] *** Guus shows as "online"
[13:05:53] *** zinid has left the room
[13:06:39] *** zinid shows as "online"
[13:20:45] *** sonny shows as "online"
[13:21:51] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[13:22:01] *** Guus has left the room
[13:22:02] *** Guus shows as "online"
[13:31:37] *** jere has left the room
[13:31:59] *** jere has joined the room
[13:33:30] *** Guus has left the room
[13:39:36] *** tux shows as "online"
[13:42:19] *** MattJ shows as "away"
[13:42:49] *** sonny shows as "away"
[13:42:51] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[13:43:05] *** la|r|ma has left the room
[13:43:06] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[13:44:43] *** sonny shows as "online"
[13:47:04] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "Hampton"
[13:48:50] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[13:49:39] *** intosi has joined the room
[13:50:09] *** Tobias shows as "away"
[13:53:48] *** moparisthebest shows as "online"
[13:54:15] *** mrkiko shows as "chat" and his status message is "mrkiko@jabber.linux.it"
[13:54:31] *** mrkiko shows as "chat" and his status message is "yo"
[13:54:39] *** valo has joined the room
[13:55:01] *** Alex has joined the room
[13:55:02] *** Alex shows as "xa" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[13:55:02] *** Alex shows as "online"
[13:57:08] *** jere has left the room
[13:59:38] *** jere has joined the room
[14:00:48] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[14:03:12] *** ralphm has left the room
[14:04:16] *** Alex has left the room
[14:11:51] *** lumi shows as "xa" and his status message is "(Idle 60 min)"
[14:13:42] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[14:13:44] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[14:15:42] *** Guus shows as "online"
[14:15:56] *** Holger has left the room
[14:16:08] *** Holger shows as "online"
[14:19:43] *** SouL has left the room
[14:19:51] *** SouL shows as "online"
[14:22:16] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[14:27:55] *** lumi shows as "online"
[14:29:01] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[14:30:24] *** efrit has left the room
[14:31:39] *** zinid has left the room
[14:32:24] *** zinid shows as "online"
[14:33:45] *** intosi shows as "online"
[14:33:49] *** efrit has joined the room
[14:35:09] *** intosi shows as "online"
[14:38:08] *** Kev has joined the room
[14:38:15] *** Kev shows as "online"
[14:39:54] *** efrit has left the room
[14:41:30] *** efrit has joined the room
[14:43:17] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[14:44:10] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[14:45:26] *** Alex has joined the room
[14:46:03] *** Guus has left the room
[14:46:04] *** Guus shows as "online"
[14:47:33] *** efrit has left the room
[14:48:14] *** Kev shows as "away"
[14:49:59] *** Kev shows as "online"
[14:50:58] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[14:51:39] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[14:51:53] *** efrit has joined the room
[14:52:46] *** sonny shows as "online"
[14:52:46] *** sonny shows as "online"
[14:54:37] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[14:54:44] *** Kev has left the room
[14:54:47] *** Kev has joined the room
[14:54:48] *** Kev shows as "online"
[14:56:13] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[14:58:56] *** jmpman has left the room
[14:59:09] *** jmpman has joined the room
[15:00:30] *** Guus has left the room
[15:04:31] *** zinid has left the room
[15:06:14] *** sonny has left the room
[15:06:18] *** sonny shows as "online"
[15:06:47] *** lskdjf has left the room
[15:07:43] *** jubalh has joined the room
[15:08:19] *** waqas has joined the room
[15:08:19] *** waqas has left the room
[15:08:21] <goffi> hi there, can I have clarification on #publish-options? As far as I remember, it was an way to configure a node on creation without having to create then configure. But it seems to have changed and to be way to do per-item configuration. I haven't had chance to follow all discussion on @standard, so a summary would be much appreciated, thanks
[15:11:25] *** Alex shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[15:11:51] <daniel> goffi: it can be both
[15:12:42] <daniel> The fields are registered. And each field defines if it's is a precondition (= node configuration on publish and enforcement) or an override
[15:15:20] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "Hampton"
[15:15:33] <goffi> But this are 2 different features. Where the fields are registered (and which fields are registered?) ?
[15:15:34] <goffi> the XEP is not clear at all about that. The examples only show publication with items, and there is not notion of node creation.
[15:17:06] <Zash> I don't think autocreation and configuration on publish is a thing that's specified
[15:17:45] <goffi> I though it was #publish-option (and it was not specified indeed, just in example as far as I remember, like many Pubsub features unfortunately)
[15:19:33] *** Guus shows as "online"
[15:20:46] <Holger> It was all totally underspecified before, but the wording has been clarified and things seem clear to me now: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#publisher-publish-options
[15:20:49] <Holger> Zash: "If the node does not exist and the service supports the "auto-create" feature, then the service shall auto-create the node with default configuration in all respects except those specified in the preconditions, and the publish succeeds."
[15:21:08] <goffi> yes that how it is implemented in SàT Pubsub
[15:21:23] <goffi> but "Each field MUST specify whether it defines METADATA to be attached to the item, a per-item OVERRIDE of the node configuration, or a PRECONDITION to be checked against the node configuration. " is really confusing, which metadata can we attach?
[15:21:34] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[15:21:35] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[15:21:40] <goffi> how to override item, as the text only mention precondition or node configuration on auto-create
[15:22:54] <goffi> I think I'll write on @standard to discuss that, because it needs to be extremly clear and it is definetely not at the moment.
[15:23:19] <Holger> goffi: Right now there's only a single registered option (access_model), and it's specified to be a PRECONDITION. So OVERRIDE/METADATA are only theoretical options as long as no field is registered with that behavior.
[15:23:31] <Zash> Holger: Is that so?
[15:23:38] <Holger> Zash: Sure?
[15:23:47] <goffi> Holger: where it is registered ? How can I check it ?
[15:26:46] <goffi> I've implemented per-item overriding for years, and I'm since willing to propose a protoXEP for that (no time so far), so I'm willing to know if current publish-option can do it (I've explained how it's done in SàT pubsub at https://www.goffi.org/blog/goffi/S%C3%A0T_DOTCLEAR_IMPORT_BLOG_default_goffi_69%3A2012%2F06%2F24%2FFine-access-tuning-for-PubSub)
[15:27:31] <Zash> goffi: I would be happier if it was split in three
[15:27:33] *** lumi shows as "online"
[15:27:39] <Holger> goffi: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#registrar-formtypes-publish
[15:28:03] <Holger> goffi: Huh you implemented it. What's the use case?
[15:28:34] <Holger> goffi: My suggestion would've been to ditch OVERRIDE/METADATA. And if someone needs that feature, re-add it using different syntax.
[15:28:57] <goffi> Zash: what do you mean split in three ?
[15:29:35] <Holger> goffi: Isn't the implementation a great PITA when it comes to RSM / MAM access, for example?
[15:29:36] <goffi> Holger: blog post restricted to some people, similar to Google circles (even if it was done before)
[15:29:56] <Zash> Three forms, where the form decides what tge fields do, not some registry
[15:30:22] <goffi> Zash: ah yes, I think it would be better indeed, and in a separate XEP
[15:31:12] *** Kev shows as "away"
[15:31:21] <Holger> goffi: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/556
[15:31:24] <goffi> I need to check SàT Pubsub code, I'm not sure of the behaviour if the node exists (I think the options are just ignored, which is not compliant which current XEP state)
[15:31:25] <Zash> goffi: You have my support if you were to draft one
[15:31:25] *** Alex shows as "xa" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[15:32:49] *** efrit has left the room
[15:32:55] <goffi> Zash: I will, but it will take time, I am already drowning in work
[15:33:04] *** Alex has left the room
[15:33:44] <Ge0rG> Yeah, reading that section of 0060 made my head explode. And I'm used to reading protocol specs.
[15:33:59] *** zinid shows as "online"
[15:35:08] <jonasw> I think we need a very diligent copy editor, ideally english mother tongue, who goes over those monsters like XEP-0060 and edits everything which is remotely unclear, while being in constant feedback with the community and council
[15:35:25] <goffi> daniel: OK it's a good thing to remove override, and probably it would be nice to remove metadata too, only keeping precondition and config setting.
[15:36:05] <daniel> i don't care very much for metadata either
[15:36:37] <Zash> jonasw: we were going to split '60 into smaller pieces
[15:36:47] <goffi> not sure if there is a use case on a per-item basis for metadata. Override there is definitely, but should be separate feature
[15:37:48] <daniel> i'd be fine with removing it for now and reintroducing it as a seperate form later if someone needs it
[15:37:56] <edhelas> daniel I do care of metadata actually
[15:38:05] <goffi> edhelas: on a per-item basis ?
[15:38:16] <edhelas> ah for items, meh, no
[15:38:28] <edhelas> sorry, misunderstanding
[15:38:34] <goffi> for node it's needed I think we all agree on that
[15:39:37] *** zinid has left the room
[15:41:55] <zinid> > ideally english mother tongue

They tend to use some rare wording which is only possible to translate with a dictionary 🙂
[15:42:03] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[15:43:12] <daniel> removing METADATA entirly changes the wording *a lot*. I'd rather only do that if we agree that this is the right thing
[15:43:30] *Holger agrees ;-)
[15:43:42] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[15:43:52] *** Zash shows as "online"
[15:43:52] <jonasw> if we remove it in a way so that we can bring it back in an addendum && we don’t have any depending XEPs currently, I don’t see any issue.
[15:43:54] *** Zash shows as "online"
[15:44:45] *goffi agrees too
[15:44:56] <edhelas> daniel in which cases you want to remove metadata ? I'm a bit lost
[15:45:09] <Ge0rG> I want that whole section burned. It doesn't make any sense.
[15:45:18] <daniel> edhelas, publish-options. we are talking about publish-options
[15:45:26] <Ge0rG> Removing metadata and override from the XEP would suffice for me, though.
[15:46:11] <daniel> removing metadata and override and maybe the ability to register additional fields would make the wording a lot more straight forward
[15:46:38] <edhelas> yeah registering fields could be quite nice and make it more flexible
[15:47:14] *** sonny has left the room
[15:47:18] *** sonny shows as "online"
[15:47:54] <Holger> Nah. No registering.
[15:48:24] <goffi> registering is not useful there, and bring a lot of complications
[15:48:29] <jonasw> no registering, but honoring <required/> so that implementations know when an option is critical?
[15:48:36] <Holger> Only node config preconditions. That makes it straightforward to understand and implement.
[15:48:39] <jonasw> that seems like a good compromise and allows later XEPs to extend things
[15:48:47] <jonasw> ah yes
[15:48:47] <Holger> And we make it work for all node config options in one go.l
[15:49:14] <Holger> jonasw: <required/> what?
[15:49:38] <goffi> that would make my current implementation nearly compliant, just need to check the precondition
[15:49:49] <jonasw> Holger, publish-options is a Data Form, right?
[15:49:58] <Holger> Yes.
[15:50:12] <jonasw> Data Forms specifies the <required/> child for fields
[15:50:28] <jonasw> users of publish-options could make it clear that a field MUST be understood or the request MUST be rejected with that
[15:50:33] <jonasw> while other unknown fields may be safely discarded
[15:50:38] <Holger> The wording already does that.
[15:50:41] <Holger> Uh.
[15:50:53] *** sonny shows as "online"
[15:51:00] <jonasw> just an idea to open the venue for future extensions without making things too complicated with a registry etc.
[15:51:20] *** zinid shows as "online"
[15:51:30] <goffi> Can't we ignore unknow fields if it's not a configuration option ? Else that would make it difficult to extend (new options specified in later XEP will not be usable on old implementations)
[15:51:46] <daniel> goffi, no
[15:51:52] <goffi> daniel: why ?
[15:51:52] <Holger> Well my suggestion was to reject anything that's not a config option.
[15:51:57] <daniel> because you have to rely on the fact that they are checked
[15:52:08] <zinid> unknown fields in practice will mean a client bug in 99% cases
[15:52:08] <jonasw> Holger, yeah, tbh, I was still thinking about the other use-cases, not Node Config overrides
[15:52:21] <goffi> but if it's not a configuration options ?
[15:52:37] <Holger> goffi: What should the publish option do then?
[15:52:39] <goffi> zinid: no, it can means a new options introduced in new XEP and not handled in current server
[15:53:06] <zinid> goffi, then it's fine for the server to return error, so a client doesn't expect the option takes effect
[15:53:11] <goffi> Holger: create node with right config, reject node with bad config, and let in place for unknow config options
[15:53:24] <daniel> how about something simple as https://gultsch.de/files/xep-0060.html#publisher-publish-options
[15:53:31] <daniel> exact wording tbd
[15:54:11] <goffi> daniel: happied with that, but worried about unknow fields
[15:54:19] <daniel> why?
[15:54:23] <Holger> goffi: You can't just ignore unknown options because clients probably want to rely on them being set. See the bookmarks XEP, for example.
[15:54:47] <Holger> goffi: If anything, you could go for jonasw's route and let the client specify whether the option is <required/>. But meh.
[15:54:59] <zinid> Holger, not to mention that you will get fancy "bug reports" like "I set this knob but it doesn't work!"
[15:55:16] <daniel> if you ever want to do something else just define your own form
[15:55:20] <Holger> goffi: I don't quite see the use case of specifying a publish option without caring whether it actually works.
[15:55:24] <Holger> zinid: Exactly.
[15:55:25] <moparisthebest> what if you just specify a new XEP 'pubsub-lite' in the time honored XSF tradition of replacing complicated XEPs with simpler ones that everyone actually wants?
[15:55:56] <Ge0rG> moparisthebest: I'm already waiting for MUC to replace MIX in five years :D
[15:56:14] <Zash> Ge0rG: Wow, aren't you the optimist
[15:56:25] <zinid> MUC to replace MIX?
[15:56:25] *** Kev shows as "online"
[15:56:31] <goffi> Holger: zinid: daniel: use case => options "serial_ids" to have ids in series instead of uuids. If present I want it to be set I specify in publish option. A server is not managing it, my publish will fail with current wording.
[15:56:38] <Ge0rG> zinid: yes, because MIX is too complicated.
[15:56:52] <zinid> Ge0rG, ah, agreed
[15:57:10] <zinid> no way I implement it in ejabberd
[15:57:14] <daniel> goffi, it will already fail with the current wording
[15:57:21] <daniel> because serial_ids is not registered
[15:57:34] <Zash> MIX looks unlikely to be implemented in Prosody either atm
[15:57:34] <daniel> you can not just invent shit without registering it
[15:57:50] <goffi> daniel: yes I didn't say the opposite, I just say the current wording and one in patch are not future-proof
[15:57:51] <zinid> goffi, can't you just request the form to check what fields are supported?
[15:58:00] <goffi> zinid: ah yes good point
[15:58:06] <daniel> goffi, just create your own form. whats the problem?
[15:58:08] <goffi> zinid: but need one more request
[15:58:26] <Holger> goffi: And it buys you a clear spec with defined behavior.
[15:58:27] <zinid> goffi, ah, you client developers are afraid of requests 😀
[15:58:33] <daniel> create a form name it publish-sequential-enforcing-agency-visual-studio-powered
[15:58:35] <goffi> :)
[15:58:35] <zinid> I"m always forgetting this 😉
[15:58:37] <daniel> and be done
[15:58:45] <goffi> OK I'm convinced now, I can just request the form
[15:58:58] *** Guus has left the room
[15:58:59] *** Guus shows as "online"
[15:59:01] <goffi> so I'm fully in for daniel's patch
[15:59:43] <Ge0rG> Do we need to bump the namespace version?
[15:59:49] <daniel> no
[15:59:50] <zinid> YES
[15:59:54] <zinid> 😀
[16:00:26] <edhelas> just bump by .05 and we're good
[16:00:35] <daniel> anyone has any suggestions on improving the wording based on https://gultsch.de/files/xep-0060.html#publisher-publish-options
[16:00:51] <jonasw> daniel, wfm
[16:01:03] *** arc has left the room
[16:01:08] *** arc has joined the room
[16:01:16] <daniel> Ge0rG, is that wording fine with you?
[16:01:24] <daniel> you complained about the entire section before
[16:02:23] <Ge0rG> daniel: no, it's not fine. You are introducing the term PRECONDITION and kind of implicitly define it in that sentence. It works if you already know what a PRECONDITION is, but otherwise you stumble upon the CAPITAL LETTERS
[16:03:01] <Holger> Hah, after pressing 'reload', I actually see the changes :-) Browser caches yay.
[16:03:09] <daniel> Ge0rG, suggestions for improvments?
[16:03:14] *** lskdjf has left the room
[16:03:15] <daniel> using lower case?
[16:03:19] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:03:26] <goffi> yes lower cae
[16:03:28] <goffi> case
[16:03:32] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:04:28] <Ge0rG> daniel: I'm trying to come up with a better wording, bear with me.
[16:05:33] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[16:05:41] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:06:35] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[16:06:47] *** lskdjf has left the room
[16:06:48] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:06:55] *** jjrh has left the room
[16:06:57] <zinid> argh, I don't understand
[16:06:58] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[16:07:17] <zinid> does this precondition magic means publish-options should borrow all options from node-config?
[16:07:24] <Holger> zinid: Yes.
[16:07:25] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:07:27] <daniel> zinid: yes
[16:07:30] *** zinid has left the room
[16:07:37] <zinid> Holger, ah, so we have a bug in ejabberd 🙂
[16:07:51] *** lumi shows as "online"
[16:07:57] <Holger> zinid: We don't comply with the version suggested a few minutes ago on gultsch.de.
[16:08:02] <Holger> zinid: Not sure I'd call that a bug :-)
[16:08:03] <Ge0rG> daniel: maybe the following:
> Each form field denotes a precondition to publishing the request. A pub-sub service advertising support for publishing options MUST check each precondition field against the node configuration of the same name, and it MUST reject the publication upon encountering unknown fields.
[16:08:14] <Holger> zinid: We do comply with the current XEP-0060 wording.
[16:08:48] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[16:08:52] *** sonny has left the room
[16:08:54] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:09:06] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:09:08] <zinid> Holger, well I just didn't know what exactly Daniel has added 🙂
[16:09:12] *** MattJ shows as "online"
[16:09:14] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:09:30] *** Guus has left the room
[16:09:35] <Holger> zinid: Ah ok. This exactly is the change he's suggesting.
[16:09:52] <daniel> `<F5>`
[16:09:57] <Holger> zinid: Currently 0060 says that 'access_model' is the only valid publish option.
[16:10:13] <zinid> Holger, yes, yes I got it 😀
[16:10:18] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:10:30] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:10:40] <Holger> daniel: Looks good to me.
[16:11:02] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[16:11:43] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:12:36] *** sonny has left the room
[16:12:38] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:13:25] <goffi> daniel: patch put aside, I didn't get you're "16:58][daniel] goffi, just create your own form. whats the problem?", what were you suggesing actually? It's a configuration option, I can't put this in a random form.
[16:13:29] *** lskdjf has left the room
[16:13:29] *** lskdjf has left the room
[16:13:29] *** lskdjf has left the room
[16:13:30] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[16:13:43] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:14:32] <daniel> goffi, well currently (as published by the XSF) you'd have to register a precondition with the registrar. i'm suggesting instead of doing that just define a form
[16:14:40] <daniel> like send a PR to xep60
[16:14:42] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:14:53] *** sonny has left the room
[16:14:56] <daniel> either way you'd have to go through the xsf
[16:14:56] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:17:27] <goffi> daniel: I'll sure do for the per-item overridding, and other feature I'm willing to standardize, but serial_ids would just be a setting like any service would add, I think it's a bit overkill to create form or go through XSF for every single config option (in the particular case of serial_ids, it could be generally useful so it may make sense)
[16:17:58] *** zinid shows as "online"
[16:19:19] <daniel> > I think it's a bit overkill to create form or go through XSF for every single config option
well that's how xep60 works in that regard. none of my PRs change that
[16:19:35] *** jere has joined the room
[16:20:20] *** sonny has left the room
[16:20:23] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:20:43] <daniel> i don't understand what exactly it is you are trying to do but either you expect a certain reaction from the server then you have to specify it anyway or you don't in which case just don't use publish-options
[16:22:06] <Ge0rG> Maybe it is METADATA?
[16:22:14] <Ge0rG> marc: so where are we regarding account-invitation?
[16:22:32] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:23:06] <goffi> daniel: I'm willing to specify node configuration atomically on creation, and publish-option is exactly what I need for that. I was worrying abount new options or vendor specific options, but as zinid rightly said I can request node configuration first, so it's alright.
[16:23:18] *** jubalh shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[16:23:24] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[16:23:42] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:24:01] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[16:25:28] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "Hampton"
[16:25:53] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:27:44] *** jubalh shows as "online"
[16:28:33] *** jjrh has left the room
[16:29:14] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[16:29:27] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[16:29:29] <marc> Ge0rG, if we do not need fancy feature like token revocation I would proceed with my initial approach and add server-side PARS
[16:29:30] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[16:30:02] <Ge0rG> marc: you could have an ad-hoc command to revoke a token :P
[16:30:02] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:30:11] *** jjrh has left the room
[16:30:35] <marc> Ge0rG, of course :)
[16:31:06] <Ge0rG> marc: do you want me to write the XEP or to criticize it once you've written? :P
[16:31:09] <marc> But I think that's too complex and could be added later
[16:31:11] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[16:31:19] <Ge0rG> marc: yeah, revocation is out-of-scope
[16:31:28] <goffi> and XEP-0060 doesn't request to register any single config option by the way (which is a good thing)
[16:31:59] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:32:17] <Ge0rG> marc: I think we have two user stories: "roster invitation with potential account creation" and "explicit account invitation". I think they should have separate ad-hoc commands, but can share wire format.
[16:32:45] <marc> Ge0rG, I agree with the first part
[16:32:57] <marc> Not sure if it makes sense to use different commands
[16:33:05] <marc> We could just change the data form
[16:33:11] <marc> If the latter is also possible
[16:33:28] <Ge0rG> marc: ah, right.
[16:33:34] <Ge0rG> marc: I remember now.
[16:33:44] *** jubalh shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[16:33:56] <Ge0rG> marc: but then as an admin, you can't create a one-click roster invitation.
[16:34:11] <marc> Ge0rG, why?
[16:34:11] *** tim@boese-ban.de has left the room
[16:34:11] *** jjrh has left the room
[16:34:19] *** lskdjf shows as "online"
[16:34:30] <Ge0rG> marc: because you always need to send back the JID entry form.
[16:34:39] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[16:35:14] <marc> Oh, *one-click* is the keyword here
[16:35:27] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:35:28] *** sonny shows as "online"
[16:36:03] *** zinid has left the room
[16:36:13] *** jjrh has left the room
[16:36:31] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[16:37:00] <Ge0rG> marc: so maybe having separate ad-hoc commands is more useful after all.
[16:37:09] *** Alex has joined the room
[16:37:19] <Ge0rG> "Send invitation" for mortals, "Send account invitation" for admins
[16:37:29] *** jubalh shows as "online"
[16:37:30] *** Alex shows as "online"
[16:38:13] <marc> Ge0rG, and you don't like the idea to provide the inviter name?
[16:38:30] *** jabberatdemo has joined the room
[16:38:46] <Ge0rG> marc: no, for two reasons: a) it is hard to validate independently and b) it's adding complexity to the process
[16:39:23] <Ge0rG> marc: I could send you an invitation that reads "Daniel Gultsch invited you to ..."
[16:39:28] <marc> Ge0rG, but it makes the invitation more personal :D
[16:39:40] <marc> Ge0rG, of course you can
[16:39:45] <Ge0rG> marc: you are sending a link to somebody. Make the message containing that link more personal.
[16:40:10] <marc> xmpp:romeo@montague.net?roster;preauth=1tMFqYDdKhfe2pwp;name=Romeo+Montague
[16:40:28] <marc> a) is not a good argument anymore ;)
[16:40:55] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[16:41:36] <Ge0rG> marc: xmpp:romeo@montague.net?roster;preauth=1tMFqYDdKhfe2pwp;name=Tybalt+Capulet
[16:41:46] <Ge0rG> marc: what now?
[16:42:04] <marc> Ge0rG, that's an example of your PARS XEP
[16:42:07] <marc> that's the point ;)
[16:42:33] <Ge0rG> marc: that's been almost a year :P
[16:42:42] <marc> Ge0rG, :P
[16:43:36] <marc> Ge0rG, but I'm okay with it, let's remove the possiblity to provide the inviter name
[16:43:46] <marc> But I would like to have nice admin options then :p
[16:43:51] <Ge0rG> marc: also, see §5.4
[16:43:58] *** Guus shows as "online"
[16:44:01] <marc> Ge0rG, I know
[16:44:14] <marc> Ge0rG, but I could copy 5.4 into the new XEP ;)
[16:44:16] <Ge0rG> I can't link to §5.4 because somebody f***ed up the anchor. Bummer.
[16:47:27] <Ge0rG> marc: technically, it is okay to have an optional name parameter in the xmpp: URI, but it shouldn't require the inviter to input text
[16:48:10] <Ge0rG> I think we need some notion of "screen name", maybe stored in account vcard, and used as the default MUC nickname and for such invitations
[16:48:12] <marc> Ge0rG, I wouldn't store it into the URI but yeah
[16:48:15] *** Kev has left the room
[16:48:25] *** @Alacer shows as "online"
[16:49:10] <marc> Ge0rG, "screen name" independent of this XEP?
[16:49:16] <Ge0rG> marc: yes
[16:49:49] <Ge0rG> marc: one day, I'll change yaxim new account creation to ask for a screenname, auto-generate a slugified JID from that and going with a secure auto-created password
[16:49:56] <marc> Ge0rG, there is a nickname field in vcard, isn't it?
[16:50:14] <Ge0rG> marc: I'm not sure screen name == nickname or rather real name
[16:50:17] <Ge0rG> maybe something in between.
[16:50:58] <Ge0rG> marc: so if you enter "Crazy Batshit" as your screenname, it would suggest "crazy.batshit@yax.im" as your JID, and fall back to "crazy.batshit.5632@yax.im" if the former is already registered.
[16:52:03] <marc> Ge0rG, sounds like a good idea
[16:52:39] <Ge0rG> marc: of course :P
[16:52:50] <Ge0rG> marc: I'm obsessed with Easy XMPP for over a year now.
[16:53:57] <jonasw> how does twitter do that?
[16:54:46] <marc> Ge0rG, hopefully easy-invitation will be rolled-out in the near future
[16:55:09] *** lumi shows as "online"
[16:55:17] <marc> Ge0rG, I'm okay with two commands: user-invitation and "account-creation"
[16:55:35] *** Guus has left the room
[16:55:40] *** Guus shows as "online"
[16:55:43] *** @Alacer has left the room
[16:56:05] <marc> user-invitation allows PARS or account creation with one click
[16:56:21] *** jabberatdemo has left the room
[16:56:45] <marc> account-creation is for admins with some options to generate an account for somebody
[16:57:30] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "I'm away"
[16:57:35] <marc> admin or other privileged pro-users
[16:57:41] <jonasw> isn’t there an account creation adhoc already?
[16:57:45] <Ge0rG> marc: user-invitation --> `xmpp:georg@yax.im?preauth=FOOBAR;ibr` --> PARS or account registration
account-creation --> form(username) --> `xmpp://username@server?preauth=FOOBAR`
[16:58:10] <Ge0rG> jonasw: yes, but there you must pre-set a password
[16:58:21] <jonasw> ah ok
[16:58:36] <Ge0rG> jonasw: we want to have one-click account setup for the invitee
[16:58:42] <marc> Ge0rG, I wouldn't make username required for account-creation but yeah looks good to me
[16:59:40] *** intosi has left the room
[16:59:46] <marc> And probably we need an appropriate URI action parameter
[16:59:54] <marc> Not sure if 'register' or 'roster' should be used
[17:00:00] <marc> Or something like 'invite'
[17:00:13] <Ge0rG> marc: hm. If you don't need a pre-defined jid for account creation, you can fallback to the PARS URI as well
[17:00:41] <Ge0rG> marc: https://xmpp.org/registrar/querytypes.html#register
[17:00:59] <Ge0rG> marc: so it would be `xmpp://username@server?register;preauth=FOOBAR`
[17:01:31] <marc> Ge0rG, yeah but maybe you have more options on account-creation and it doesn't cost anything to make this field optional
[17:01:46] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, for account-creation ?register make sense
[17:01:56] <marc> Ge0rG, not sure if it makes sense for PARS
[17:02:03] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[17:02:12] <marc> because it doesn't lead necessarily to account creation
[17:02:43] <Ge0rG> marc: it doesn't.
[17:03:03] <marc> Ge0rG, yes :)
[17:03:30] *** Guus has left the room
[17:03:36] <marc> But preauth is not a good action name IMO
[17:03:55] <Ge0rG> marc: I'd leave away the action name from PARS links for brevity.
[17:04:30] <Ge0rG> marc: there are actions for "roster" and "subscribe". Both are vaguely wrong.
[17:04:38] *** sezuan has left the room
[17:04:41] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[17:04:42] *** sezuan has joined the room
[17:04:49] <marc> Ge0rG, I know but 'preauth' could be anything
[17:04:52] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[17:04:59] <marc> And to be compatible with other action names I would like to use an other name
[17:05:11] <marc> And actually action name don't have a value
[17:05:15] <marc> +s
[17:05:21] <Ge0rG> marc: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2016-June/031138.html
[17:07:18] <marc> Ge0rG, Nobody suggested to use an action name with value nor the name "preauth"
[17:07:42] <Ge0rG> marc: preauth is not an action, it's a query parameter.
[17:08:01] <marc> Ge0rG, and what's the action? nothing?
[17:08:04] *** jcbrand has left the room
[17:08:15] <Ge0rG> marc: yes
[17:08:29] *** jcbrand has joined the room
[17:08:57] <marc> That's not better in my opinion :)
[17:09:29] <marc> I would prefer something like ?invite;preauth=...
[17:09:33] <marc> Or ?invite;token=...
[17:09:46] <marc> If not even using ?roster
[17:09:58] <marc> Which makes sense for PARS-only IMO
[17:10:14] <jonasw> is this bikeshedding or actual protocol discussion?
[17:10:17] <Ge0rG> marc: please respond to my mail from a year ago.
[17:10:39] <jonasw> If marc doesn’t have archives on his local machine, forging an email which is in fact a reply to that will be massively tricky :)
[17:10:59] <Ge0rG> marc: technically, the correct format for a query-less URI would be `xmpp:georg@yax.im?;preauth=FOOBAR`
[17:11:27] <Ge0rG> jonasw: I can bounce my original mail, allowing to respond properly.
[17:11:34] <marc> Ge0rG, why is this URI query-less?
[17:11:54] <marc> preauth is part of the query component
[17:12:03] *** Lance has joined the room
[17:12:04] *** Lance shows as "online"
[17:12:16] <Ge0rG> Sorry, "action-less"
[17:12:31] <Ge0rG> marc: I care more about short URIs and small QR codes.
[17:12:50] <Ge0rG> I'm sure somebody from Council will -1 me on that protocol violation, one day.
[17:13:00] <marc> Ge0rG, a few char more or less...
[17:13:05] <jonasw> isn’t that all just conventions
[17:13:06] *** jcbrand has left the room
[17:13:07] <jonasw> isn’t that all just convention?
[17:13:07] <marc> +s
[17:13:57] <Ge0rG> jonasw: yeah
[17:14:20] <Ge0rG> marc: did you know there are some email clients that break links longer than 72 characters?
[17:15:02] *jonasw hides in shame
[17:15:11] <Ge0rG> marc: if you are marc_the_nice_guy@jabber.some-important-domain.com and have a long PARS token, you might be out of luck already.
[17:15:46] <Ge0rG> There's a reason why my XMPP service is yax.im :P
[17:15:46] <marc> Ge0rG, tbh no and I wouldn't care about it ^^
[17:16:18] <Ge0rG> marc: why do you care about the right query action, then?
[17:16:53] <marc> Ge0rG, because there is some sort of system for the XMPP URIs and we shouldn't break it IMO
[17:17:09] <Ge0rG> marc: it's already broken.
[17:17:17] <marc> Ge0rG, because of your XEP?
[17:17:25] <Ge0rG> marc: no, before that. I've written about it being broken. Nobody cared.
[17:17:53] <marc> Ge0rG, so let's care from now on ;)
[17:17:57] <moparisthebest> so ejabberd guys, seems like it could be vulnerable to https://robotattack.org/ depending on ciphers chosen, I tested conversations.im and it is safe because it only supports PFS ciphers
[17:17:58] <Ge0rG> marc: did you read my mail?
[17:18:13] <moparisthebest> erlang is specifically called out as being vulnerable fyi
[17:18:17] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[17:18:30] <marc> Ge0rG, https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2016-June/031138.html this one?
[17:19:19] <Ge0rG> marc: yeah
[17:19:27] *** debacle shows as "online"
[17:20:02] <marc> Ge0rG, I'll read it later.. I hope it's worth ;)
[17:20:31] <Ge0rG> marc: Good. We can continue the discussion afterwards, then. Or tomorro.
[17:20:37] <Ge0rG> marc: Good. We can continue the discussion afterwards, then. Or tomorrow.
[17:20:53] *** Guus shows as "online"
[17:21:05] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[17:21:36] <jonasw> lolwtf, tls is still doing the broken PKCS padding?
[17:21:53] <jonasw> I thought this was just some funny anecdote in the lectures
[17:22:52] *** Tobias shows as "away"
[17:24:21] <moparisthebest> jonasw, nah it always comes back to bite everyone :P
[17:24:37] <moparisthebest> who's ejabberd dev in here, zinid ?
[17:24:47] <jonasw> Holger, too
[17:25:03] *** lumi shows as "online"
[17:25:11] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[17:25:12] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[17:25:22] <Ge0rG> marc: but it's good that you see the same problems I encountered. You are on the right track ;)
[17:27:02] *** jere has left the room
[17:27:09] *** jere has joined the room
[17:27:40] <zinid> moparisthebest, ejabberd doesn't use erlang's native ssl support, it uses openssl
[17:28:04] <moparisthebest> oh, excellent, good to know, thanks zinid
[17:28:14] <zinid> and I'm not sure what this attack is about, I'm not a cryptobitch
[17:28:45] <moparisthebest> yea no need to get bogged down in details, just should be concerned if you are vulnerable or not
[17:29:07] <jonasw> TL;DR: they managed to sign something using facebooks SSL private key they supposedly stole. game over.
[17:31:58] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[17:32:12] <zinid> what's the point in all this TLS stuff, if vulnerabilites are being found every month
[17:32:40] <zinid> only leads to false sense of protection
[17:32:58] <moparisthebest> do you have something better? :P
[17:33:06] <moparisthebest> at least it's widely used and studied
[17:33:30] *** Guus has left the room
[17:33:39] <zinid> moparisthebest, well, the point is: if I didn't use TLS, I would be vulnerable to heartbleeding, where the whole system can be borked
[17:33:50] <zinid> not sure what I gain from using TLS in this case
[17:34:03] <zinid> *I wouldn't be vulnerable
[17:34:43] *** Guus shows as "online"
[17:35:07] <jonasw> zinid, yeah, tls could use replacement by something much simpler. I think TLS 1.3 is on the right path with dropping support for a lot of legacy things. Not RSA though.
[17:35:13] *** daniel has left the room
[17:35:19] <Ge0rG> zinid: you get protection against all passive attacks, and also some protection against FSB and NSA
[17:35:53] <Ge0rG> I think we should standardize on Curve25519, because DJB is an awesome m*****f****r
[17:35:54] <zinid> Ge0rG, I think FSB and NSA already collected all vulnerabilities of openssl like that one with heartbleeding
[17:36:03] <moparisthebest> yea most of the TLS problems are with legacy support, they realized that and dropped all legacy from TLS 1.3
[17:36:17] <Ge0rG> zinid: heartbleed looked way too much like a plausible-deniability backdoor, yeah.
[17:36:29] <moparisthebest> but zinid it's a choice between plaintext and no protection all the time, or TLS and best protection possible most of the time
[17:36:48] *** Lance has left the room
[17:37:16] <jonasw> moparisthebest, although the argument that heartbleed may do more damage than plaintexting everything is plausible
[17:37:20] <zinid> moparisthebest, but I don't remember a single case of MITM attack, but I remember a lot of openssl fuckups
[17:37:29] <zinid> jonasw, exactly
[17:37:42] <moparisthebest> really? because some networks do MITM as normal matter of business
[17:37:43] <jonasw> openssl is particularly bad too
[17:37:48] <moparisthebest> s/networks/ISPs/
[17:38:04] <moparisthebest> https://forums.xfinity.com/t5/Customer-Service/Are-you-aware-Comcast-is-injecting-400-lines-of-JavaScript-into/td-p/3009551
[17:38:14] <moparisthebest> they even RFC'd it https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6108
[17:38:18] <Ge0rG> moparisthebest: I just was going to paste that.
[17:38:49] <Ge0rG> It's especially awesome for remote APIs
[17:38:56] <moparisthebest> I bet
[17:39:12] <moparisthebest> tl;dr everything should be TLS all the time, no exceptions :'(
[17:39:16] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[17:39:41] <Ge0rG> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15892282 ;)
[17:39:59] *** edhelas has left the room
[17:40:22] <Ge0rG> It's nice and fair for the game to crash once you've used up 90% of your data cap.
[17:40:26] *** edhelas has joined the room
[17:40:48] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[17:40:53] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[17:45:12] *** Steve Kille has joined the room
[17:45:13] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[17:49:14] <zinid> moparisthebest, I mean I don't remember MITM in xmpp
[17:49:46] <moparisthebest> well if they do it to HTTP :)
[17:49:55] <moparisthebest> comcast will soon inject <message> stanzas
[17:50:02] <moparisthebest> UPGRADE YOUR MODEM
[17:51:25] <zinid> still, no a single case of xmpp mitm
[17:52:27] *** sezuan has left the room
[17:52:30] *** sezuan has joined the room
[17:54:04] <Ge0rG> Reminds me of the good old times of CTCP PING +++ATH0
[17:54:52] *** mimi89999 has joined the room
[17:54:58] *** arc has left the room
[17:54:59] *** arc has joined the room
[17:56:03] *** arc has left the room
[17:56:06] *** arc has joined the room
[17:56:32] *** Guus has left the room
[17:56:33] *** Guus shows as "online"
[17:57:10] *** uc has joined the room
[17:57:30] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[17:58:37] *** mimi89999 shows as "online"
[17:58:48] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[17:59:28] *** daniel has left the room
[17:59:41] *** daniel has joined the room
[18:00:44] *** sezuan has left the room
[18:00:48] *** sezuan has joined the room
[18:01:30] *** arc has left the room
[18:01:31] *** arc has joined the room
[18:01:44] *** goffi has left the room
[18:02:17] *** Steve Kille has joined the room
[18:02:22] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "Hampton"
[18:02:22] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[18:04:43] *** jcbrand has joined the room
[18:06:30] *** Guus has left the room
[18:07:42] *** lumi shows as "away" and his status message is "(Idle 10 min)"
[18:08:22] *** jubalh has joined the room
[18:11:25] *** lumi shows as "online"
[18:16:14] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[18:17:56] *** intosi has joined the room
[18:18:55] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "At Home"
[18:21:35] *** Guus shows as "online"
[18:22:57] *** @Alacer has left the room
[18:23:15] *** @Alacer has joined the room
[18:24:09] *** lskdjf has left the room
[18:24:10] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[18:29:14] *** zinid shows as "online"
[18:29:25] <edhelas> XML ads injection in the messages stanzas for the non-prenium accounts
[18:29:55] <Ge0rG> edhelas: spam filtering as a premium feature.
[18:30:24] <Ge0rG> The good thing about it: you can cash in from both sides
[18:30:34] <edhelas> there is so much business to do
[18:31:00] *** daniel has left the room
[18:31:01] <Ge0rG> I should do a post about spam filtering on yax.im.
[18:31:06] <Zash> Just figure out a way to get users to pay to view ads and you're golden
[18:31:09] *** daniel has joined the room
[18:31:37] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[18:32:07] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[18:34:10] <moparisthebest> to catch up to the web with all it's features we just need a XEP to send arbitrary javascript to clients so they'll execute it
[18:34:18] <moparisthebest> I mean we had XHTML-IM for that but now it's dead :'(
[18:34:24] *** daniel has left the room
[18:34:33] *** daniel has joined the room
[18:34:39] *** intosi shows as "online"
[18:36:21] <edhelas> JS over Markdown over XMPP messages
[18:37:28] <Zash> RCE as a service
[18:39:11] *** jjrh has left the room
[18:39:17] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[18:39:20] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[18:39:23] *** daniel shows as "online"
[18:39:26] *** daniel shows as "online"
[18:39:36] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[18:39:51] *** intosi shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[18:40:19] *** intosi shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[18:40:20] *** intosi has left the room
[18:41:43] <Ge0rG> moparisthebest: JS is horribly inefficient to mine crypto moneys
[18:42:39] <moparisthebest> Ge0rG, what about WebAssembly
[18:42:46] <Zash> Surely there are wasm miners already running in your browser
[18:42:59] <moparisthebest> XEP-0400 Arbitrary WebAssembly over XMPP
[18:43:26] <Ge0rG> moparisthebest: what about it? Does it support OpenCL?
[18:43:45] <moparisthebest> probably?
[18:44:49] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[18:51:22] *** Guus has left the room
[18:51:29] *** Guus shows as "online"
[18:51:36] *** arc has left the room
[18:51:37] *** arc has joined the room
[18:51:56] *** sonny shows as "online"
[18:52:55] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[18:52:57] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[18:52:59] *** arc has left the room
[18:53:20] *** daniel has left the room
[18:53:22] *** daniel shows as "online"
[18:53:57] *** matlag has left the room
[18:54:01] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[18:57:12] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[18:57:21] *** arc has joined the room
[18:57:29] *** debacle shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[18:57:42] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[18:57:55] *** debacle shows as "online"
[18:58:17] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:02:58] *** daniel has left the room
[19:03:06] *** daniel shows as "online"
[19:03:17] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:04:16] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:04:27] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:05:59] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:06:26] *** jjrh has left the room
[19:06:42] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[19:06:44] *** jjrh has left the room
[19:07:50] *** jjrh shows as "online"
[19:09:50] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[19:10:15] *** zinid has left the room
[19:12:24] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:13:32] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:15:06] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:19:10] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:24:04] *** ralphm has left the room
[19:24:27] *** jcbrand has left the room
[19:25:05] *** SamWhited has left the room
[19:27:29] *** matlag shows as "online"
[19:27:57] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:28:57] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:29:44] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:30:21] *** tux shows as "online"
[19:30:45] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:33:17] *** debacle has left the room
[19:36:30] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:37:33] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:38:17] *** MattJ shows as "away"
[19:38:40] *** blabla shows as "online"
[19:40:11] *** sonny has left the room
[19:40:14] *** sonny shows as "online"
[19:41:33] *** lskdjf has left the room
[19:41:34] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[19:41:55] *** sonny shows as "away"
[19:42:33] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:43:57] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:44:16] *** sonny has left the room
[19:44:19] *** sonny shows as "online"
[19:45:30] *** lovetox has joined the room
[19:46:20] <Ge0rG> marc: right, please read my email and then we agree to not use any action at all.
[19:48:39] *** sonny has left the room
[19:48:42] *** sonny shows as "online"
[19:50:59] *** Alex has left the room
[19:51:00] <marc> Ge0rG, okay, give me some minutes but I'm pretty sure I don't like the concept :D
[19:51:42] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:52:43] *** xnyhps shows as "online"
[19:53:48] *** sonny has left the room
[19:53:51] *** sonny shows as "online"
[19:54:07] <marc> Ge0rG, okay, I don't see any argumentation in your mail to continue with meaningless "preauth" without action
[19:54:18] <marc> just because some other actions are poorly specified?
[19:56:56] <Ge0rG> marc: it's not meaningless. You can see from the JID that it is clearly a contact JID.
[19:57:06] *** zinid shows as "online"
[19:58:08] *** sonny shows as "online"
[19:58:12] <Ge0rG> marc: the actions are so underdefined, that yaxim just ignores the action and derives what to do from the other query parameters.
[19:58:15] *** jcbrand has joined the room
[19:58:37] <Ge0rG> marc: the only exception I'm using is `join` for MUCs
[19:59:07] <Ge0rG> if there is a `body=`, send a message, otherwise add to roster.
[19:59:11] *** sonny has joined the room
[19:59:24] <Ge0rG> marc: how does your client handle <xmpp:georg@yax.im> ?
[19:59:37] <marc> Ge0rG, depends
[19:59:58] <Ge0rG> marc: depends on what?
[20:00:32] <marc> If that's my account, if this contact is already in my roster
[20:01:02] <Ge0rG> marc: it's not your account. Now what will happen?
[20:01:17] <marc> Ge0rG, it probably adds you to my roster
[20:01:40] *** arc has left the room
[20:01:43] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[20:01:49] *** arc has joined the room
[20:01:53] <Ge0rG> marc: and what happens on <xmpp:georg@yax.im?subscribe>? On <xmpp:georg@yax.im?roster>?
[20:02:46] <Ge0rG> marc: what if I'm on your roster already? Should you open a chat tab instead? Or the "Edit roster item" dialog?
[20:03:26] <marc> Ge0rG, The same argumentation applies to your ?preauth... what if you already subsubcribed? Should you open a chat window for the user?
[20:03:52] <Ge0rG> marc: can we leave out PARS for a moment, please?
[20:03:58] <marc> Ge0rG, this has nothing to do with the 'action' concept
[20:04:15] <Ge0rG> marc: preauth is not an action, it's a query parameter.
[20:04:41] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, but what happens needs to be specified
[20:04:52] <marc> If you use an "action" or just query parameters
[20:04:56] *** Alex has joined the room
[20:04:59] <Ge0rG> marc: where?
[20:05:26] <Ge0rG> marc: do we want to write an Informational XEP that mandates what happens to a ?roster action if I'm already on your roster?
[20:05:34] <Ge0rG> marc: nobody cares enough.
[20:05:46] <Ge0rG> marc: See, Zash was the only one to answer to my question.
[20:06:11] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, nobody cares which is why all clients behave differently which sucks, right?
[20:06:29] *** zinid has left the room
[20:06:35] <Ge0rG> marc: there is a defined list of actions. None of them works as I would expect.
[20:06:51] <Ge0rG> marc: you would have to send two URIs with ?roster and ?subscribe for the full features
[20:07:26] *** arc has left the room
[20:07:27] *** arc has joined the room
[20:07:34] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, they don't work I know. But that's not an argument against using something like "?invite;token="
[20:07:37] <marc> Is it?
[20:07:39] <Zash> I did whatnow?
[20:07:49] <Ge0rG> Zash: you responded to a mail in mid 2016.
[20:08:10] <Ge0rG> marc: But ?invite won't be supported by any clients at all!
[20:08:49] <marc> Ge0rG, correct, ad-hoc commands and QR code generation too ;)
[20:09:24] <marc> All clients need to be adapted for user-invitation
[20:09:27] <Ge0rG> marc: no
[20:09:37] <marc> Ge0rG, okay, all except yaxim
[20:09:44] <Ge0rG> marc: NO!
[20:09:48] <marc> Ge0rG, why?
[20:09:58] <Ge0rG> marc: the good thing about PARS is that it's 100% backwards compatible
[20:10:07] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[20:10:15] <marc> Ge0rG, no client except yaxim implements PARS, correct?
[20:10:29] <Ge0rG> marc: right, but most clients implement roster subscription.
[20:10:38] <Ge0rG> marc: and some even support using xmpp: URIs for that.
[20:11:27] <marc> Ge0rG, what's the point here? I would like to implement user-invitation and account creation and I'm okay with that fact that clients and servers need to be adapted
[20:11:50] <marc> Ge0rG, I can not invite somebody with PARS and Conversations
[20:11:59] <marc> Because Conversations doesn't support it
[20:12:04] <marc> It doesn't generate a QR for me
[20:12:16] <Ge0rG> marc: you can invite a Conversations user with PARS, but you'll have to add them manually afterwards.
[20:12:37] <marc> Ge0rG, yes I know but I can not invite somebody else with Conversations
[20:13:03] <Ge0rG> marc: so what's your point now?
[20:13:12] <marc> Ge0rG, clients have to be adapted
[20:13:21] <Ge0rG> marc: the good thing about PARS is that only the sending client needs to be changed.
[20:13:31] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, that's correct
[20:13:59] <marc> But that's not important for me if I don't use yaxim but Gajim or Conversations or whatever
[20:14:30] <marc> My point: implementing an URI for this XEP in a client is not a big deal
[20:14:31] <Ge0rG> marc: yes. First we need two implementations, then we can make it a proper XEP, then people will follow
[20:14:38] <marc> Because we have to implement a lot more
[20:15:43] <Ge0rG> marc: I'd go with Zash's suggestion and propose xmpp:georg@yax.im?add - my client will ignore the action anyway, because the existing actions are all bad.
[20:15:49] *** zinid shows as "online"
[20:15:51] <marc> And that's why I started to implement PoC in those clients... there should be a working version for all major Clients after this XEP is done
[20:16:48] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[20:17:42] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[20:17:42] <Ge0rG> marc: but in practice, I've chosen not to create a new action type and just to rely on the receiving client to be smart about it when encountering a JID with query parameters.
[20:18:16] <marc> Ge0rG, we should focus on more important things than URI definition. We can discuss the URI thing after all the complicated stuff is done
[20:18:19] <marc> Ge0rG, right?
[20:18:26] <Ge0rG> marc: right.
[20:18:37] <Ge0rG> marc: so how would I add the preauth token into an IBR?
[20:18:56] <Ge0rG> it needs to be indicated at the beginning and not as a form element.
[20:18:57] <marc> data form as described in my awesome XEP?
[20:19:03] <marc> :(
[20:19:03] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[20:19:04] <marc> :D
[20:19:10] <Ge0rG> marc: "described"? :P
[20:19:15] <marc> well,...
[20:19:16] <marc> :D
[20:19:32] <marc> Ge0rG, what's wrong about the form element?
[20:20:11] <Ge0rG> marc: how does the server know that it needs to return a form element and not just do IBR?
[20:20:11] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[20:21:12] <marc> Ge0rG, it returns the form element if user-invitation is supported
[20:21:26] <Ge0rG> marc: so now all normal IBR clients will stumble upon that?
[20:21:36] <marc> it also returns <required/> if IBR is allowed with token only
[20:21:55] *** Ge0rG has left the room
[20:21:57] <Ge0rG> marc: let's say your server supports both normal IBR and preauth, and uses preauth to add the invitee to the roster.
[20:22:00] *** Ge0rG shows as "online"
[20:22:04] <Ge0rG> marc: let's say your server supports both normal IBR and preauth, and uses preauth to add the inviter to the roster.
[20:22:25] <Ge0rG> marc: now everyone who wants to IBR with you gets a stupid "invite-token" dialog popup
[20:22:37] <marc> Ge0rG, that's correct
[20:22:56] <marc> But that's also a feature because I didn't have to implement much :D
[20:23:20] <Ge0rG> marc: it's a feature to annoy all future users because you are lazy?
[20:23:34] <marc> Ge0rG, no because it's a PoC
[20:23:52] <Ge0rG> marc: it's great for a PoC, but we need to make it a protocol now
[20:24:04] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, tell me your solution
[20:24:13] <marc> Ge0rG, probably we need to change all clients for that, right?
[20:25:42] <Ge0rG> marc: No?
[20:25:57] <marc> Ge0rG, just tell me your idea :)
[20:27:31] *** sonny has joined the room
[20:27:38] <Ge0rG> marc: server announces support for IBR <preauth/> in caps. client requests IBR form, receives normal form, sends registration IQ with a <preauth/> element, done.
[20:27:39] *** SouL shows as "online"
[20:27:56] <Ge0rG> marc: server announces support for IBR <preauth/> in caps. client requests IBR form with a special <preauth/> marker, receives form with <preauth/>, sends registration IQ with a <preauth/> element, done.
[20:28:24] *** jonasw shows as "away"
[20:29:56] *** zinid has left the room
[20:30:09] <marc> Ge0rG, sounds good, you like the term preauth, hm? :D
[20:30:44] *** sonny shows as "away"
[20:30:45] *** sonny shows as "away"
[20:30:53] <marc> Ge0rG, how does this IBR form request for preauth look like?
[20:31:10] <Ge0rG> marc: I have put some thought into the name; it's short and it indicates what it is without depending on a certain technology
[20:32:20] *** lovetox has left the room
[20:32:30] <Ge0rG> <iq type='get' id='reg1' to='shakespeare.lit'>
<query xmlns='jabber:iq:register'><preauth xmlns='urn:xmpp:pars:0'/></query>
</iq>
[20:32:51] *** SamWhited shows as "online"
[20:33:34] <Ge0rG> marc: I suppose this won't break IBR even if the server doesn't support PARS, and it lets the server know that the client intends to do preauth on this IBR
[20:33:45] <Ge0rG> so it can provide different fields in the response
[20:34:16] <Ge0rG> I think this is different from the typical data-forms flow which is intended for the user to enter more data. But I might be wrong and the standards@ ML will correct me.
[20:34:58] *** sonny shows as "online"
[20:36:23] <marc> Ge0rG, sounds reasonable
[20:37:09] <Ge0rG> marc: does the above XML look good to you?
[20:37:35] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, except for the term "pars"
[20:37:51] <Ge0rG> marc: in the namespace?
[20:38:01] <marc> yes
[20:38:25] <Ge0rG> call it `paac` then, for pre-authenticated account creation :P
[20:38:48] <Ge0rG> marc: I'd be fine with renaming the namespace to urn:xmpp:preauth:0 as well
[20:38:58] <marc> haha
[20:38:59] <marc> :D
[20:39:28] <Ge0rG> Even if it would break existing yaxim installations :P
[20:39:34] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[20:39:43] *** arc has left the room
[20:39:58] <marc> however, 'pars' doesn't fit for account creation :)
[20:40:36] *** arc has joined the room
[20:40:58] <Ge0rG> marc: but pars defines the <preauth/> element, and there is nothing wrong with element reuse :P
[20:41:39] <marc> aahh, that sounds wrong to me ^^
[20:42:12] <Ge0rG> marc: let's skip over it and solve the next problem.
[20:42:19] <Ge0rG> we are bike shedding again.
[20:42:50] *** blabla has left the room
[20:45:49] *** zinid shows as "online"
[20:48:24] *** jubalh has joined the room
[20:49:15] <marc> Ge0rG, correct... I don't see other problems that a server operator may want to limit the number of account creations per user on a time basis or something like that
[20:49:25] <marc> So we should think about it
[20:50:15] <Ge0rG> marc: those limitations can be implemented on the server, no need to change the wire format
[20:50:35] *** zinid has left the room
[20:50:38] *** Alex shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[20:56:40] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, I just don't like the idea that the server generates different types of tokens when a user hits the limit
[20:57:24] <Ge0rG> marc: I thought we were over that already?
[20:57:54] <marc> Ge0rG, it just bugs me ;)
[20:58:11] *** zinid has left the room
[20:58:45] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[20:59:32] <Ge0rG> marc: no, I mean that you have different ad-hoc commands for IBR and PARS tokens.
[21:01:43] <marc> Ge0rG, Oh, I thought we have IBR+PARS (where IBR might be disabled if the user hits a limit) and IBR-only
[21:01:53] *** arc has left the room
[21:01:54] <marc> Ge0rG, so we have PARS and IBR-only?
[21:02:11] <Ge0rG> marc: we have PARS+IBR and IBR-only
[21:02:28] <marc> Ge0rG, correct
[21:02:42] <marc> But what happens if the user hits a limit?
[21:02:46] <Ge0rG> marc: I'm not sure what the right solution would be.
[21:02:47] <marc> No PARS and IBR at all?
[21:02:59] <marc> Or just PARS?
[21:03:00] <Ge0rG> marc: I think that sending a PARS-only token is better than no token.
[21:03:08] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[21:03:15] <Ge0rG> marc: also PARS+IBR doesn't mean all of the receipients are going to IBR immediately
[21:03:31] <marc> Ge0rG, yes, probably but it bugs me that the user won't this
[21:03:52] *** McKael shows as "online"
[21:04:09] <Ge0rG> marc: so let's say I try to generate 100 PARS+IBR tokens. Should I be throttled after 50? Or only after 50 of the tokens have been used?
[21:04:09] *** xnyhps shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[21:04:10] <marc> ups... won't know this
[21:04:24] <Ge0rG> What if I don't understand how "Send invitation" works and my first 50 tokens get lost?
[21:04:53] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[21:04:53] <marc> That's a good question
[21:05:17] <Ge0rG> marc: I think the only sensible solution is to limit registrations, not token issuance
[21:05:34] <Ge0rG> marc: so your 51st friend will get a "this token is invalid" response to IBR
[21:05:51] <marc> Ge0rG, wow, but that's strange isn't it?
[21:06:01] <Ge0rG> marc: is it?
[21:06:19] <marc> You generate a valid token and somehow it doesn't work although the token isn't expired
[21:06:39] <Ge0rG> marc: do you have unlimited IBR on your server?
[21:06:49] <marc> Ge0rG, I have no IBR at all
[21:06:58] <Ge0rG> marc: my server will block out after three registrations from the same IP
[21:07:01] *** matlag shows as "online"
[21:07:06] *** arc has joined the room
[21:08:00] <marc> Ge0rG, I would limit the token generation either based on time or amount or both...
[21:08:14] <marc> Every token has an expiration date..
[21:08:25] <Ge0rG> marc: yes, but that's independent of your potential abuse scenario
[21:08:52] *** daniel shows as "online"
[21:08:59] <marc> Ge0rG, why? A user is not allowed to invite more than X people, for example?
[21:09:05] <Ge0rG> marc: your ad-hoc command could also return a text field that explains the token validity
[21:09:33] <Ge0rG> marc: if a user is allowed to invite X people, and he generated X invitations already that all were lost. What then?
[21:09:54] <Ge0rG> marc: another ad-hoc command to reset pending invitations?
[21:10:24] <marc> Ge0rG, well, this depends on server operations anyway. But you could allow token generation after all tokens were expired?
[21:10:38] *** Alex shows as "xa" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[21:10:43] <Ge0rG> marc: so the user is blocked for two weeks?
[21:10:52] *** Alex has left the room
[21:11:00] <marc> Ge0rG, depends on your lifetime?
[21:11:16] <Ge0rG> marc: yes. Maybe it's two days. But how is that useful?
[21:11:23] <marc> Ge0rG, maybe not more then X tokens in a hour?
[21:12:01] <Ge0rG> marc: maybe, but I still think that you should limit account registrations instead.
[21:12:02] *** daniel shows as "online"
[21:12:23] <Ge0rG> marc: and even if you don't, you can easily link all the new accounts to the initial abuser.
[21:13:32] <Ge0rG> marc: think about it some more, I'm out for tonight.
[21:13:38] <marc> Ge0rG, I don't know. If a token doesn't work and is valid with respect to the expiration date it is confusing and wrong IMO
[21:13:42] <Ge0rG> P.S: protocol design is hard.
[21:13:56] <marc> No, good protocol design it hard ;)
[21:14:19] *** lumi has joined the room
[21:16:36] *** la|r|ma has left the room
[21:16:42] *** la|r|ma shows as "online"
[21:25:25] *** Guus has left the room
[21:25:33] *** Guus shows as "online"
[21:25:59] <moparisthebest> ‎[04:11:00 PM] ‎marc‎: Ge0rG, depends on your lifetime?
‎[04:11:16 PM] ‎Ge0rG‎: marc: yes. Maybe it's two days.
[21:26:03] <moparisthebest> wow context matters
[21:26:11] *** McKael shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[21:26:11] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "At Home"
[21:26:44] *** efrit has joined the room
[21:29:23] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[21:30:18] *** arc has left the room
[21:30:19] *** arc has joined the room
[21:30:30] *** sonny has left the room
[21:30:49] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[21:31:07] *** Tobias shows as "online"
[21:31:19] *** Alex has joined the room
[21:31:20] *** Alex shows as "xa" and his status message is "Auto-Status (untätig)"
[21:31:26] *** Alex shows as "online"
[21:32:14] *** goffi has joined the room
[21:33:17] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[21:35:42] *** daniel has left the room
[21:36:06] *** jcbrand has left the room
[21:38:10] *** sonny shows as "online"
[21:38:11] *** sonny shows as "online"
[21:44:17] *** efrit has left the room
[21:45:19] *** jere has joined the room
[21:45:47] *** arc has left the room
[21:46:02] *** arc has joined the room
[21:46:04] *** arc has left the room
[21:46:25] *** arc has joined the room
[21:55:06] *** jere has joined the room
[21:55:22] *** jubalh has joined the room
[21:58:06] *** matlag has left the room
[22:02:23] *** marc has left the room
[22:05:14] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[22:07:16] *** moparisthebest has left the room
[22:09:24] *** arc has left the room
[22:09:25] *** arc has joined the room
[22:10:14] *** arc has left the room
[22:14:44] *** blabla has left the room
[22:15:09] *** Bunneh has left the room
[22:15:17] *** arc has joined the room
[22:16:25] *** moparisthebest shows as "online"
[22:16:30] *** jubalh has left the room
[22:16:41] *** Bunneh has joined the room
[22:16:41] *** Bunneh shows as "online"
[22:20:02] *** intosi has joined the room
[22:20:04] *** intosi shows as "online"
[22:20:05] *** Bunneh has left the room
[22:20:05] *** Bunneh has joined the room
[22:20:05] *** Bunneh shows as "online"
[22:21:35] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[22:23:17] *** stefandxm shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[22:27:56] *** Steve Kille has left the room
[22:30:35] *** stefandxm shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[22:38:50] *** marc has left the room
[22:39:53] *** jubalh has joined the room
[22:44:43] *** zinid has joined the room
[22:45:29] <edhelas> is there a proper way today to know if a remote MUC has been disconnected ? (like the service went down…)
[22:49:32] *** intosi has left the room
[22:49:44] *** intosi has joined the room
[22:50:07] <zinid> edhelas: ping your nick
[22:50:11] *** Steve Kille has joined the room
[22:50:18] *** Steve Kille shows as "online" and his status message is "At Home"
[22:51:35] *** lumi has joined the room
[22:57:51] *** zinid has left the room
[22:59:27] <Ge0rG> And pray that none of your clients disconnects or lags in that time
[22:59:58] *** tux has left the room
[23:00:13] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[23:04:34] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:04:34] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:04:40] *** Alex has left the room
[23:07:39] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:07:40] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:09:44] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:09:44] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:10:31] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:10:31] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:10:52] *** intosi shows as "online"
[23:13:01] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:13:03] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:14:07] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:14:08] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:14:37] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:14:37] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:14:57] *** daniel has left the room
[23:15:02] *** daniel has joined the room
[23:15:28] *** daniel has left the room
[23:15:28] *** intosi shows as "online"
[23:15:32] *** intosi has left the room
[23:15:36] *** daniel has joined the room
[23:16:36] *** intosi has joined the room
[23:18:00] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[23:18:08] *** intosi has left the room
[23:18:37] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:18:37] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:19:27] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:19:27] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:19:45] *** Steve Kille shows as "away" and his status message is "At Home"
[23:20:05] *** arc has left the room
[23:20:06] *** arc has joined the room
[23:20:13] *** matlag shows as "online"
[23:21:28] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:21:29] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:21:30] *** arc has left the room
[23:22:52] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:22:53] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:26:25] *** arc has joined the room
[23:26:38] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:26:38] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:28:15] *** edhelas has left the room
[23:28:28] *** edhelas has joined the room
[23:32:20] *** Holger has left the room
[23:32:27] *** Holger shows as "online"
[23:32:54] *** daniel has left the room
[23:32:57] *** daniel has joined the room
[23:33:30] *** Holger shows as "online"
[23:34:29] *** Holger shows as "online"
[23:34:36] *** Holger has left the room
[23:34:41] *** Holger shows as "online"
[23:38:02] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[23:39:06] *** lskdjf has left the room
[23:39:07] *** lskdjf has joined the room
[23:39:53] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[23:43:19] *** Holger has left the room
[23:43:32] *** Holger shows as "online"
[23:57:51] *** daniel has left the room