tom>tom, can you tell my corporate IT dept, they use all the proprietary blackboxes, riverbed, telari, cisco, and palo alto
I think it's more of a leadership issue tbh. The places I've worked at, the CEO understood how to sell a product. They were not engineers. They paid engineers to make the engineering detail decisions. That understood that is; after the whole whole reason they are paying them for.
neshtaxmpphas left
tomwell, the CEO was more knowing how to lead all the different teams
tombecause we did have a sales team and they did sales
tomand an accounting team which managed the money
tomthe 'officers' acted as the glue
tomand were very good at it
tomand delegated things they were not good at to people who were
tomthen again the product was IP transit, so the quality of the technology was the end goal
tomnot just a means
wurstsalathas left
Tobiashas left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
pdurbinhas joined
pdurbinhas left
pdurbinhas joined
davidhas left
davidhas joined
pdurbinhas left
Nekithas joined
curenhas left
pdurbinhas joined
igoosehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
Zashhas left
Zashhas joined
wurstsalathas joined
moparisthebesthmm nyco not a huge deal but I don't think https://github.com/xsf/xeps/commit/6e1c4675714d80824f5f951a64c2d47e14deee4b#diff-48188c65e1a20d564eb9dbe110506a16 is correct either
moparisthebest> the document specifies to DO THIS
moparisthebestis what I meant, probably could be worded better, but two doesn't make sense there to me
moparisthebestmaybe "This document specifies an algorithm to additionally look up records..." or "This document specifies a method to additionally look up records..." or "This document specifies a way to additionally look up records..."
waqashas left
Tobiashas joined
pdurbinhas left
goffihas joined
Lancehas joined
pdurbinhas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
igoosehas left
waqashas joined
igoosehas joined
goffihas left
goffihas joined
Mikaelahas joined
karoshihas joined
igoosehas left
igoosehas joined
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
waqashas left
Mikaelahas left
Mikaelahas joined
debaclehas joined
Lancehas left
Mikaelahas left
Mikaelahas joined
jonas’moparisthebest, huh, you’re right
jonas’I need to revert htat
jonas’It somehow made sense to me when I read it, but it doesn’t
andyhas joined
pdurbinhas left
curenhas joined
remkohas joined
pdurbinhas joined
COM8has joined
pdurbinhas left
COM8has left
COM8has joined
frainzhas left
pdurbinhas joined
COM8has left
frainzhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
adityaborikarhas joined
Ge0rGthat DNSSEC vs SRV debate last night, was it based on Travis' email?
jonas’vice versa probably
Ge0rGoh, the timestamps
Ge0rGHow could I have possibly missed the addition of a MUST NOT?
neshtaxmpphas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
igoosehas left
lovetox_has joined
pdurbinhas left
eevvoorhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
pdurbinhas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
ralphmhas left
ralphmhas joined
Yagizahas joined
adityaborikarhas left
andyhas left
andyhas joined
mimi89999has left
mimi89999has joined
adityaborikarhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
debaclehas left
adityaborikarhas left
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
lnjhas joined
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
sezuanhas joined
igoosehas joined
lskdjfhas joined
lumihas joined
igoosehas left
waqashas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
cookiehas joined
waqashas left
adityaborikarhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
igoosehas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
lumihas left
debaclehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
pdurbinhas left
Syndacehas left
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
Syndacehas joined
lovetox_has left
curenhas left
pep.heh, most protoXEPs in the inbox fail at linking to the proper xslt file so the .xml link fails
pep.Maybe we could also have a link to that file in the inbox
Ge0rGthat would make sense
pep.I submitted a PR
jonas’pep., against the nginx config?
pep.ah, no I just added a symlink, just like there were already for the .ent and .dtd
Ge0rGpep.: I've answered to the reactions "thread" now
pep.:)
Chobbeshas joined
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
APachhas left
eevvoorhas left
bennehas joined
sezuanhas left
pdurbinhas joined
APachhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
pdurbinhas left
APachhas left
Zashhas left
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
Zashhas joined
APachhas joined
curenhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
APachhas left
Chobbeshas left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
matlaghas left
matlaghas joined
adityaborikarhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Lancehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
waqashas left
valohas left
valohas joined
APachhas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
rionhas left
rionhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
lumihas joined
larmaGe0rG: I answered your answer ;)
APachhas left
mr.fisterhas left
Ge0rGlarma: I think you misread my mail. "Each reaction SHOULD contain a legacy reaction body" ;)
APachhas joined
Ge0rGgood points on Reactions and LMC, though.
Ge0rGI always disliked LMCs limitation to "the last message"
igoosehas left
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
pep.I am sure this could be changed, no? I actually liked your point about LMC
igoosehas joined
pep.Actually, all except backwards compatibility
Ge0rGReactions surely can define an exception to the strict LMC rule
Ge0rGeven then, it's not an issue.
Ge0rGinstead of a correction you see a new legacy reaction
pep.legacy?
pep."new legacy"?
Ge0rGlegacy reaction = body
pep.Ok. Not for me, thanks :x
Ge0rGwhat's not for you?
mr.fisterhas joined
frainzhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
frainzhas joined
APachhas left
Yagizahas left
waqashas joined
debaclehas left
curenhas left
adityaborikarhas left
larmaGe0rG: no I didn't misread your mail, my opinion is SHOULD NOT or MUST NOT have a body
larmaIf we do any business rules regarding body
larmaA fallback body will render the feature unusable as long as there are legacy clients
pep.And we all know that there will always be legacy clients :)
Ge0rGlarma: your reaction seemed to imply you read it as "MUST have"
igoosehas left
Ge0rGlarma: I disagree. The lack of a legacy body will render the feature unusable.
Ge0rGhaving that feature will increase the pressure on legacy users.
pep.I disagree with your last statement
pep.Unless you make the fallback broken on purpose to bully implementations, (granted, one could argue 393 is broken and it might be good enough, but not everybody agrees with me on this)
Ge0rGpep.: the more important question is whether you agree with the previous statement ;)
pep.I disagree as well
pep.And I disagree in a more general way than just reactions
pep.I mean I disagree, with your statement
pep.I mean I disagree with your statement
Ge0rGpep.: I see you moved that back to the list. very good
pep.yep
Ge0rGthanks, I'll write a response when I'm less busy.
curenhas joined
Wojtekhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
Chobbeshas joined
igoosehas joined
Lancehas left
igoosehas left
Nekithas left
Wojtekhas joined
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
alacerhas left
Lancehas joined
ziggyshas left
davidhas left
davidhas joined
igoosehas joined
LanceI just noticed that there's not really an easy way to get an individual entry out of MAM if you already know its archive id. Closest I can find is requesting the item before/after the id I have, then request 1 item after/before that one, to get the item I originally wanted.
APachhas joined
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
Nekithas joined
waqasLance: You likely want to go for the item before it. Going for the item after and then the item before that is prone to race condition.
LanceAh, yes
LanceIt works ok enough for use case of deep linking into history, if you also want +/-N additional messages of surrounding context
Lancebut i was tinkering with saving just the archive id in a pubsub item to do pinned messages
igoosehas left
waqasI imagine there was an assumption of "if you know the ID, you already have the message". MAM is not POP, and isn't a full DB system either.
Lanceyeah, that makes sense
waqasThough a lot of folks do keep pushing (with some success) to have MAM just be a SQL dialect. It's harder to implement on things which don't have SQL indices and such.
Lancei can resolve it pretty easily by letting my server understand a new custom form field