XSF Discussion - 2019-09-19


  1. MattJ

    Who is currently responsible for the next compliance suites?

  2. Ge0rG

    MattJ: me!

  3. MattJ

    Oh, nice :)

  4. Ge0rG

    MattJ: say that again after you tried convincing me to add something.

  5. MattJ

    We'll see :)

  6. Guus

    maybe he knows of someone else that is going to suggest something that Matt thinks is a bad idea.

  7. Ge0rG

    MattJ: you might bribe me by rewriting the introduction section with something useful

  8. MattJ

    No, Ge0rG guessed it in one attempt

  9. MattJ

    Did we agree that splitting a XEP doesn't require council?

  10. Ge0rG

    MattJ: I can't give a definitive answer to that, valid for all circumstances.

  11. Zash

    Editorial changes are up to the editor?

  12. Ge0rG

    to the author, normally.

  13. MattJ

    iirc the MIX split wasn't put through council

  14. MattJ

    I don't really mind either way, just would be nice to know how many battles I need to fight

  15. Zash

    And with whom

  16. MattJ

    Doing most productive standards-based stuff feels like a battle

  17. Seve

    :D

  18. Ge0rG

    MattJ: you could start by saying what exactly you plan.

  19. MattJ

    Ge0rG, and extend the duration of the battle? :)

  20. Ge0rG

    MattJ: this is getting too meta for me

  21. MattJ

    Me too, just wait for the PRs

  22. jonas’

    scary

  23. Ge0rG braces for impact

  24. Zash

    inb4 over 9000 XEPs

  25. Ge0rG

    Just split the existing ones on each heading.

  26. Zash

    When are we finishing the XEP-0060 split?

  27. Ge0rG

    Zash: after everybody implements MIX

  28. jonas’

    everybody including libpurple?

  29. jonas’

    is "everybody implements MIX" the new "when duke nukem forever comes out"?

  30. Zash

    Pidgin with MIX support running on Hurd

  31. Ge0rG

    jonas’: yes.

  32. Ge0rG

    It used to be PlayStation 3 vs DNF vs DM8000 for me, but eventually, all three happened.

  33. MattJ

    In-progress MAM diff: https://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/stdin-s2ilB8Kj

  34. Seve is on mobile for a few minutes

  35. Guus

    Board meeting time

  36. Guus

    Ralph sends his apologies.

  37. Guus

    Seve is here, being very mobile

  38. Seve

    :D

  39. Guus

    MattJ , nyco_ ?

  40. MattJ

    Here

  41. nyco_

    _o/

  42. nyco_

    thx to Daniel for the minutes

  43. Guus

    Carré!

  44. Guus

    MattJ do you want to take this one?

  45. nyco_

    what?

  46. Guus hands gavel

  47. MattJ pulls up trello

  48. MattJ

    0) Present: Guus, MattJ, nyco_ and Seve

  49. MattJ

    Any minute-taking volunteers?

  50. Guus

    that awkward moment when everyone's looking at the same person.

  51. Guus

    I'll do them this time.

  52. MattJ

    and while volunteers ponder, anyone with topics for the agenda that are not already on Trello?

  53. MattJ

    Thanks Guus

  54. Seve

    None here

  55. nyco_

    Thx Guus, no new item from me

  56. MattJ

    1) Topics for decisions

  57. MattJ

    1.1) CC by-sa, https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/409

  58. nyco_

    is the full webiste under CC by-sa?

  59. nyco_

    also the XEPs?

  60. MattJ

    From a quick skim of the discussion, it appears we lost the licence from the website?

  61. nyco_

    because we have a lot of contributors

  62. nyco_

    https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/graphs/contributors

  63. nyco_

    117

  64. nyco_

    no need for a CLA, I guess

  65. MattJ

    The XEPs have their own policy

  66. nyco_

    that PR is obsolete anyway, we can trash it

  67. nyco_

    I can add a CC by-sa (latest) in each newsletter individually, at no cost

  68. Seve

    I remember something happened and that PR had to wait for some reason, but can't remember why

  69. nyco_

    there is no legal terms, nor any terms of service

  70. Guus

    From what I read in the PR, Goffi wants the newsletter to explicitly state that it's CC By-SA licensed, so that its content can be translated shared on other sites.

  71. nyco_

    IANAL

  72. MattJ

    I see no problem with that in itself

  73. Guus

    JC mentions that the entire website probably _should_ be under this license anyway

  74. Seve

    We may just be missing to add that on every newsletter and that would be it?

  75. nyco_

    for the newsletter, on my side, no worry to make it CC by-sa explicity, for all starting from now, or individually

  76. Guus

    Goffi mentions that it still is not, and by adding the license at least to the newsletter, the problem thta he's having would be fixed.

  77. nyco_

    that's a micro issue, what about the macro ?

  78. MattJ

    Well, we can first add it to the newsletter, and then resolve the website

  79. Guus

    If we at one point had the website under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ and the license reference got lost during a website makeover, I have no issue in adding https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ to each newsletter.

  80. MattJ

    I think allowing distribution and translation of the newsletter is higher priority

  81. Seve

    Definitively

  82. nyco_

    https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

  83. nyco_

    why only 2.5?

  84. nyco_

    https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/News_and_Articles_for_the_next_XMPP_Newsletter#Thx_and_CTA.2C_Call_To_Action_.28remove_this_mention_before_publishing.29

  85. nyco_

    added

  86. Guus

    2.5 is what we had. I don't know what the differences are between 2.5 and 4.0

  87. nyco_

    so it this PR obsolete now? in which case we can reject it

  88. nyco_

    1.5

  89. nyco_

    differences between 4.0 and 2.5 is 1.5 :)

  90. nyco_

    you're welcome... :/

  91. MattJ

    Guus, what evidence do you have that 2.5 is what we had?

  92. Guus

    JC's comment in https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/409#issuecomment-369945588

  93. MattJ

    Right, I was looking for more

  94. Guus

    pulling up wayback machine now...

  95. Seve

    Like an evidence? :D

  96. MattJ

    In the interests of getting things moving, I motion that we publish the newsletter as cc-by-sa in future, and tackle the larger issue of the website separately

  97. Guus

    agreed

  98. nyco_

    ok, all newsletters from now on are under latest CC by-sa anybody against that?

  99. nyco_

    +1 for that motion

  100. MattJ

    Seems like we're in agreement - Seve?

  101. nyco_

    I raise the question: what version

  102. nyco_

    I motion "the latest"

  103. Seve

    Just thinking about if the XSF apart from the author could have the rights?

  104. Seve

    but I'm totally +1 with it

  105. MattJ

    4.0 seems fine to me, unless someone has a reason to object

  106. nyco_

    we are pointing to news, that we write, there will be some copy-pasting though, which is legally authorised

  107. Guus

    I don't have a reason to object.

  108. Guus

    Can't find a reference to an exact version in the wayback machine on short notice (it ... is .. slow).

  109. nyco_

    no, not 4.0, but "latest", which means when a new version is published, we auto-upgrade

  110. MattJ

    nyco_, I'm not sure you can just do that

  111. nyco_

    you can

  112. Guus

    let's not auto-upgrade. We don't know what we're agreeing to, by doing that.

  113. MattJ

    or want to

  114. MattJ

    Right

  115. nyco_

    I got lawyers in my coworking space, I'll confirm

  116. nyco_

    then when a new version of the license is published, we raise the question again

  117. Seve

    cool

  118. nyco_

    or we can just trust the license issuer to be just more competent than we are

  119. MattJ

    Ok, I'll respond to the PR with our feedback

  120. nyco_

    thx MattJ

  121. Seve

    Thank you

  122. MattJ

    1.2) DOAP

  123. Guus

    so we agreed to not auto-update?

  124. Guus

    (for the minutes?)

  125. Seve

    No auto-upgrade, no

  126. Link Mauve

    Hi, I’m here to answer any question you have about 1.2.

  127. MattJ

    Guus, the PR is for 4.0 on the newsletter, so I think that's what we will go with for now

  128. Guus

    ok

  129. MattJ

    if anyone objects, shout, but I think that can be addressed separately

  130. MattJ

    DOAP PR is https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/409/files

  131. MattJ

    Nope

  132. MattJ

    Copy/paste fail. DOAP PR is https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/594

  133. Guus

    I'm having concerns

  134. MattJ

    Technical or philosophical?

  135. nyco_

    I have just asked my lawyers: you can publish content under "CC by-sa or later"

  136. nyco_

    > Technical or philosophical? can it be another option?

  137. MattJ

    nyco_, thanks for the info

  138. Guus

    - DOAP as a protocol seems pretty new/unused - no updates in its git history for over a year. Is this the right tool to be used for this? - Adding more details to software listing on the XSF website is a slippery slope, as discussed before. - Asking for DOAP data would add hurdles for new projects to be listed - some projects already don't take the effort to do this simple listing - I don't want to make this more difficult.

  139. MattJ

    1) doesn't concern me. I think the alternative is making up something of our own, which has zero tooling/etc. - DOAP is RDF, which has a bunch of existing tooling and projects around it

  140. Link Mauve

    - DOAP is used at least by CPAN (Perl repository) and PyPI (Python repository), I expect other ones too, and there were minimal additions I had to add to support our usecase.

  141. Seve

    DOAP data should be optional for new projects (or any projects) to be listed. The more you provide, the better. But that should not block

  142. Link Mauve

    AppStream might be another to look into.

  143. nyco_

    DOAP could structure the community a lot, as well as contribute to SEO

  144. MattJ

    2) I'm curious what the concrete problems are here. In the past discussions have been about how we can objectively verify someone's support for a certain protocol. Here they are self-reporting, and we just state that

  145. MattJ

    3) it's optional, not a hurdle

  146. Guus

    3) if some projects do it, your listing has to do it to 'keep up'

  147. Link Mauve

    For your third point Guus, I expect DOAP to allow relaxing the renewal requirement, for instance if a project just got a new release in the past year we could automatically consider it as the most recent renewal and avoid the manual one.

  148. MattJ

    Guus, and I'm fine with that - I think it's a great thing for a project to have

  149. Guus

    Link Mauve good point.

  150. Seve

    Guus, that means more incentive for projects to become better

  151. nyco_

    this specific DOAP format may seem overkill though

  152. Link Mauve

    The exact rules are of course to be discussed.

  153. MattJ

    nyco_, I agree, but it can be automated

  154. MattJ

    and I don't see a better/simpler format than someone we just cook up ourselves

  155. Link Mauve

    nyco_, the main reason I went for this format was that it was already used elsewhere, had existing parsers, and so that other people could use them for different purposes than what we originally thought about.

  156. MattJ

    *than something

  157. Seve

    In this example you can see here: https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/xep-0048.xml Where it says "Software support", I would appreciate a lot a link or a comment to a page explaining how this data/support info is obtained, so we state it is not crafted by us

  158. nyco_

    Link Mauve : that's what I used "may"

  159. Link Mauve

    This isn’t just about xmpp.org, but for any consumer to derive data from our list of XMPP software.

  160. Guus

    Seve that link doesn't work for me.

  161. nyco_

    Link Mauve : good point, that's why I mentioned SEO

  162. Seve

    https://i.imgur.com/lx9zSpJ.png

  163. Link Mauve

    Guus, Chromium is known to have issues with running JavaScript on XSLT-transformed pages, you may prefer to use a pre-rendered page.

  164. Guus

    Do we want to apply this before the spec has been ironed out?

  165. Seve

    Guus, maybe you can check my screenshot

  166. Guus

    Link Mauve I got a 404 actually, but nevermind. Seve's screenshot is useful.

  167. Guus

    I quite dislike that XEP example, by the way

  168. nyco_

    that software support table is awesome

  169. MattJ

    because?

  170. Guus

    I'd hate for discussions around 'why is my implementation not listed'

  171. MattJ

    "because you didn't provide a DOAP file"

  172. Seve

    Because you didn't provide

  173. MattJ

    "here's how"

  174. Seve

    ok MattJ, you win this time

  175. Seve

    That's why I'm saying we need that other page explaining this

  176. Link Mauve

    Seve, good point, we can add any such link once we have one written. :)

  177. Guus

    I don't like how that almost forces people to use this at all.

  178. nyco_

    I don't get that "force", please explain?

  179. MattJ

    Guus, it doesn't force, but obviously if they do this then they benefit

  180. MattJ

    and I really see no problem - why wouldn't you do it?

  181. MattJ

    It's not like we're asking for money

  182. Seve

    I have some other frontend/interface points to discuss, but maybe that should go into another conversation

  183. Guus

    By not complying, you're at a disadvantage.

  184. MattJ

    So why not comply?

  185. Link Mauve

    Guus, the idea was to do it similarly to the w3c HTML5 pages, which for each section (for us each XEP I guess? At least for now) you can see which browsers support the feature.

  186. MattJ

    What are the barriers?

  187. nyco_

    I share Guus' concerns about putting pressure on software projects owners, who are already struggling

  188. MattJ

    nyco_, this removes the annual renewal requirement already, so they can spend their time elsewhere

  189. Link Mauve

    We may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website.

  190. Guus

    why not comply: time/money and a spec that's not ironed out.

  191. Seve

    To me, that gives you more reasons to keep up with your project. I find it a bit "weird" to have a client but not a list of what do you support, etc

  192. nyco_

    MattJ there is still non-code maintenance to be done

  193. Seve

    We may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website. Problem solved!

  194. Link Mauve

    Guus, note that this PR doesn’t modify the XEP page at all atm.

  195. moparisthebest

    https://caniuse.com/ ?

  196. Link Mauve

    It only adds the data to Pelican for further use.

  197. Seve

    >We may even create a web page where you can input your software data and it will generate a beautiful DOAP file for you to host on your website. Problem solved!

  198. Link Mauve

    moparisthebest, this kind of website could perfectly use the DOAP data we will gather.

  199. nyco_

    Link Mauve : agree a form can simplify people's lives

  200. Guus

    Link Mauve true.

  201. Link Mauve

    nyco_, I can add that as an actionable.

  202. MattJ

    I am strongly strongly in favour of this, and we can only make it better and easier over time

  203. nyco_

    moparisthebest : and the shiny new https://www.caniemail.com

  204. MattJ

    I see absolutely no reason why any project would be barred from participating

  205. Seve

    I feel the same excitement!

  206. nyco_

    we need our own canixmpp.com

  207. Link Mauve

    That was the reason I proposed this PR as early, so we can discuss it and figure out the points to be resolved before going full out with it. :)

  208. nyco_

    yeah, looks like we can build so much with only the small adoption of a format

  209. MattJ

    The meeting is over time. Do we want to vote on approving the PR in this meeting, or provide some actionable feedback on it?

  210. nyco_

    looks like we have a consensus that DOAP can be cool

  211. nyco_

    we have not agreed on the details and next steps yet

  212. nyco_

    that's my feeling

  213. Seve

    I would like to ask for some frontend tweaks if possible (in the sense of, if those can be done by somebody)

  214. MattJ

    Seve, there is no frontend yet (in this PR)

  215. Seve

    Ah, right hah :)

  216. MattJ

    This is just some tooling to fetch the data

  217. Seve

    I went too far

  218. MattJ

    and then more PRs can follow, which actually do something with it

  219. Link Mauve

    Seve, note that there is no frontend work in this PR, it only adds a "doap" entry for each software we have in our lists, and a simple Python parser for them.

  220. Guus

    If the question is only to add a link to software listing on our website (but I think that the PR also includes some kind of script?), I'd not object to just that.

  221. Guus

    what does the parser do?

  222. nyco_

    so let's continue that discussion on the next board meeting?

  223. Seve

    I would be ok with voting for this PR

  224. MattJ

    Yeah, I think we're going to have to call this one unfinished. I have another meeting to attend in a few.

  225. Link Mauve

    Guus, it parses a DOAP file and adds the data to Pelican’s internal structs, for further use.

  226. MattJ

    Feel free to continue discussion afterwards

  227. Link Mauve

    I could remove it from the PR if you want to only add the doap URLs.

  228. MattJ

    2) Date of next

  229. MattJ

    +1w

  230. Seve

    }1

  231. Seve

    +1

  232. Guus

    +1w wfm

  233. MattJ bangs the gavel

  234. Guus

    I need to run too.

  235. Seve

    Thank you everybody! thanks Link Mauve for being present, that helps a lot

  236. Seve

    and Guus for the minutes, we love you!

  237. Link Mauve

    And to you all for running the board. :)

  238. Guus

    You should run next year!

  239. Guus

    see: council and board elections! 🙂

  240. Daniel

    i think having the software list on xmpp.org list the compliance suite status is very helpful (and somewhat overdue) for users. it is fine to get your weekend project listed on their. but users need to be able to quickly figure out in what state a client is before clicking the link. and doap files seem to be a good way to figure that out automatically. also the reverse thing (show which software supports a given XEP) is nice as well. especially for libraries. (the list should be less in your face and also collapsible; but that's details)

  241. Link Mauve

    The design of the table in the XEP was edhelas’s work, kudos to him for that, but that’s a first attempt.

  242. Link Mauve

    We obviously can improve on it. :)

  243. Link Mauve

    Now that Pelican has access to the status of the XEPs per client, we could automatically select the relevant compliance suite badge.

  244. Daniel

    peli-who?

  245. Link Mauve

    The website generator used for xmpp.org.

  246. Daniel

    i see

  247. Daniel

    yes that would be super helpful. i mean right now the user will have to click through each website to find something that is actually good

  248. Daniel

    it might also bring more visibility to the compliance suits themselves

  249. Link Mauve

    sonny, you may be interested, ↑

  250. sonny

    Link Mauve, yes! I'm working on the proposal today and will send it to you

  251. sonny

    for review

  252. Link Mauve

    sonny, the whole DOAP thing might play well with it.

  253. sonny

    indeed

  254. Link Mauve

    See the messages since 15:50:49.

  255. Ge0rG

    > i think having the software list on xmpp.org list the compliance suite status is very helpful Daniel: for that, a simple tuple of `"compliance-suite": 2019` and `"compliance-level": "advanced-im"` would be more than sufficient

  256. Ge0rG

    DOAP is significant overkill for that matter. I see how it's useful, but I really would like to have the CS level in the software listing rather sooner than later

  257. Ge0rG

    which was one of the points of the Badge.

  258. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: is there an elegant way to make use of implicit dependencies in DOAP? i.e. I don't actually do anything with RSM, except for applying it in MAM

  259. Ge0rG

    Or: I'm using 0049 only for Bookmarks

  260. Daniel

    It might not be worth listing at all?

  261. Ge0rG

    Maybe.

  262. Ge0rG just realized that CS-2020 is missing one of the most important XEPs, ever. XEP-0245

  263. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, DOAP is purely descriptive, it would be up to consumer scripts to derive data from it.

  264. Link Mauve

    Also for user-facing lists I expect we wouldn’t show 0059 or 0049 at all, instead display Feature: Bookmarks.

  265. Link Mauve

    “we” being any random consumer script.

  266. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, !

  267. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: so I need to enter all the dependencies manually, explicitly?

  268. Link Mauve

    If you want to advertise them, I’d say yes.

  269. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: is there a mid-term URL for the style.xsl that I can use on the RDF file checked into my git?

  270. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, I have it at https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/style.xsl (just updated it), but I’m not sure about CORS things.

  271. Link Mauve

    Do you even need CORS with XSLT?

  272. Ge0rG

    > Unsafe attempt to load URL https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/style.xsl from frame with URL https://op-co.de/tmp/yaxim.rdf.xml. Domains, protocols and ports must match.

  273. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: so how can I commit it to source control and have it renderable?

  274. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, use xslt-proc as part of your website’s build system?

  275. Link Mauve

    Or rely on the browsers’ XSLT processors by making sure you serve it with the correct MIME type.

  276. Link Mauve

    Or rely on the browsers’ XSLT processors by making sure you serve it with the correct Content-Type.

  277. Ge0rG

    I'm building my website from a different repository.

  278. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: so how's this for now? https://yaxim.org/doap/yaxim.rdf.xml

  279. Ge0rG

    Also why is 0030 even versioned 2.5rc3?

  280. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, I’m not aware of short-name in DOAP, and neither is the DOAP owl.

  281. Ge0rG ~blames~ thanks wurstsalat

  282. Link Mauve

    If you want to invent new properties you have to do them in a different namespace.

  283. Ge0rG

    so should name be the long name or just "yaxim" then?

  284. Link Mauve

    Just yaxim I think.

  285. Link Mauve

    As an implementation detail of the xmpp.org Pelican integration I started, it should match the name used on xmpp.org.

  286. Ge0rG

    ah well, it will be fun with Bruno the Jabber™ Bear

  287. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: that list has many supplementary XEPs now, no idea which ones to kick out.

  288. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, otherwise it looks good. :)

  289. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: awesome!

  290. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: why is the xsl referencing ../style.css btw?

  291. Ge0rG

    it makes self-hosting moar complicated

  292. Link Mauve

    I think because PulkoMandy has a the sample DOAP files in a directory, with the XSLT and CSS in the parent.

  293. Ge0rG

    ah well. I won't ever touch that again, anyway.

  294. Ge0rG

    Is there a more elegant way to make the DOAP apply for Bruno as well as for yaxim, than `cp yaxim.rdf bruno.rdf`?

  295. Link Mauve

    ln -s?

  296. Link Mauve

    Also no, you’ll have to change the name probably.

  297. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: how am I supposed to change name and desc... yeah

  298. Zash

    cp

  299. Ge0rG

    cp is more elegant than cp?

  300. pep.

    Template it somehow?

  301. Zash

    cp+sed>cp

  302. Ge0rG

    Sigh.

  303. MattJ

    Yeah, I think automating it is the way

  304. Link Mauve

    Zash, that’s UUOC. :p

  305. MattJ

    Re-posting my in-progress MAM diff: https://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/stdin-s2ilB8Kj

  306. MattJ

    lovetox and jonas’ ^ hopefully it addresses some of the issues you have asked about

  307. Zash

    > and also implement , and clients that depend on these fields MUST verify [...]

  308. MattJ

    Good catch

  309. Zash

    Bug in the thing or in the text?

  310. MattJ

    I think the text, but looks like I already fixed it

  311. Ge0rG

    MattJ: will you also handle my preferences-as-a-tristate remark from standards@?

  312. Zash

    Tristate? Which email?

  313. MattJ

    Ge0rG, preferences have been removed :)

  314. MattJ

    (they will be submitted as a separate XEP)

  315. Daniel

    MattJ, so assuming i use after-id and I want the second page? will i just make a new request with a new after-id or do i RSM?

  316. MattJ

    Daniel, it's confusing because there is overlap, but RSM seems to not be enough

  317. Ge0rG

    Zash: (c) from https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-November/033762.html

  318. MattJ

    Daniel, so I would imagine before-id/after-id should be used for filtering, and RSM only for paging (as it was designed)

  319. MattJ

    and I just need to figure out if/what text should be added about that

  320. Ge0rG

    It's great to dig out years-old mails that nobody responded to.

  321. Zash

    Ge0rG: We added that to Prosody at least, right?

  322. Daniel

    MattJ, so to answer the question on the second page i'd be using RSM?

  323. Ge0rG

    MattJ: I suppose that you'll add preferences into a separate XEP, then. That would be a great opportunity to sneak it in.

  324. Ge0rG

    Zash: please read all of it.

  325. Zash

    Ah

  326. MattJ

    Daniel, yes, at which point if you only have after-id in the query and are using <after> in RSM, you could drop after-id with no change in the results you see

  327. MattJ

    But that wouldn't be necessary

  328. Daniel

    right. and/or I would be in the slightly confusing situation where i have an after-id and a rsm after that are different?

  329. MattJ

    Yep

  330. MattJ

    If you find it confusing, just specify one or the other

  331. MattJ

    One selects the query range, one selects the page

  332. MattJ

    But you could change the range to begin at the start of the page you want to request, and you'll get the same results

  333. Daniel

    right. so 'count' is not the full archive

  334. MattJ

    Right

  335. MattJ

    I suspect this will be quite a pain to implement on the server side, fwiw, need to investigate that

  336. MattJ

    But the goal is to solve real problems that people are having with MAM (as clients), so I want to make sure these changes solve those problems before going much further

  337. Daniel

    i always thought it was supposed to fix server side issues?

  338. Daniel

    MattJ: are you going to write a security section and/or other words regarding the client having to match the query ID with running queries and verify the sender ID? If not I could maybe volunteer to do that

  339. Daniel

    most clients seem to be fine with just abusing RSM for that

  340. MattJ

    I can include that, yeah

  341. MattJ

    Made a note

  342. MattJ

    I think abusing RSM is fine in general, and I'm not even sure it's abuse... if you look at the archive as a stream of messages and the client wants successive pages

  343. MattJ

    It just gets messed up in corner cases, such as where people want to fill a hole in the past

  344. Daniel

    ah. because you can’t have both

  345. MattJ

    Yeah

  346. MattJ

    Also, <before> in RSM has a slightly different meaning

  347. MattJ

    <before> in RSM means you want the page before the id you provide

  348. MattJ

    before-id doesn't select the page, you'll still get the oldest page first

  349. MattJ

    This probably needs some extra clarification in the doc also

  350. Ge0rG

    MattJ: you should also have a section on "Order of events", for clients that desire a mostly-historically-linear access to the log

  351. MattJ

    Rough description of what it would contain?

  352. Ge0rG

    i.e. fetch MAM before enabling carbons / sending presence-available, then immediately close the gap :>

  353. MattJ

    Right

  354. MattJ

    That's originally what this section was: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html#sync

  355. MattJ

    a nice how-to for clients

  356. Ge0rG

    Very nice.

  357. MattJ

    and then it just didn't work, because of the race

  358. Ge0rG

    and then Bind2 never happened

  359. MattJ

    so I documented the race problem and postponed the how-to for a brighter day, when it was fixed

  360. MattJ

    so I'd like to make bind2 happen

  361. MattJ

    or bind-not-2, whatever it takes to get something done

  362. Ge0rG

    MattJ: MAM-sub

  363. MattJ

    because it's pretty easy to fix this

  364. Ge0rG

    just gimme MAM-sub: an atomic switchover from MAM to live traffic, given on a date/id passed by the client; auto-enabling of "sent" carbons, delivery of all received messages, similar to the Carbon rules but with no forwarded wrapper, immediate acking with mam-id of outgoing messages

  365. Ge0rG

    ah, yeah. wiping of all MAMed messages from offline, delivery of the remaining offline messages

  366. Ge0rG

    keep 0198 and session binding out of it.

  367. Zash

    That's not what I thought "MAM-sub" meant.

  368. Ge0rG

    MattJ, Zash: https://gist.github.com/ge0rg/5ae3365196a0c046fc596bbf707fdc15

  369. Ge0rG

    MattJ: this will solve all MAM problems, except for MUC-PMs

  370. Ge0rG

    and it's sufficiently easy to make me wonder why it's not there yet ;)

  371. Daniel

    all MAM problems?

  372. Ge0rG

    Daniel: that was a slight exaggeration.

  373. Ge0rG

    It will only solve the problems I'm bitching about for two years.

  374. Daniel

    i've been using. gather last_id; enable_carbons, send presence, fire mam query for years w/o any known issues

  375. Daniel

    sure a "get mam-id for sent messages" would be nice

  376. Daniel

    (i also feel like we've talked about that a week ago)

  377. Ge0rG

    Daniel: yes, it works, at the cost of client side deduplication

  378. Daniel

    what are you going to dedup?

  379. Daniel

    offline messages?

  380. Ge0rG

    Offline, online and MAM results

  381. Ge0rG

    Also my database schema requires messages to arrive roughly in chronological order.

  382. Daniel

    well yes you need dedup but online + mam result will rarly happen

  383. Ge0rG

    Rarely is not never

  384. Ge0rG

    Mobile connections may be very slow, especially in Germany

  385. Daniel

    sure. like i said you'll need dedup. but traffic wise or what ever you are concerned about it's not an issue

  386. Daniel

    i mean you are getting like 1 duplicate message or what? who cares

  387. MattJ

    Daniel: your XMPP client will never succeed while you have that attitude

  388. MattJ

    Everyone knows success depends on a perfect protocol first

  389. Ge0rG

    🤐

  390. Ge0rG

    There is actually one other issue with synchronizing MAM. How do I decide whether to ring the phone notification sound or not?

  391. jonas’

    delay

  392. Daniel

    wait until catchup is complete. crossrefenece with messages received from your other instances. take chat markers into account. and then bleep once if there are messages in the new queue

  393. Ge0rG

    Daniel: regardless of whether it's a fresh sync or just a reconnect after 10mins of lack of coverage?

  394. Daniel

    yes

  395. Daniel

    i mean depends on what a fresh sync is to you

  396. Ge0rG

    I just installed the client

  397. Daniel

    are you downloading the entire MAM?

  398. Daniel

    i use what i described in catchup situations. first install isn’t catchup

  399. Ge0rG

    The current beta is downloading 31 days, I'll probably limit it to 7 or so.

  400. lovetox

    Great MattJ that will certainly help to fill holes

  401. lovetox

    i just wonder is the field request not enough to detect fields

  402. lovetox

    do we need another feature?

  403. lovetox

    sure its one less roundtrip

  404. lovetox

    but are we going to add extended2, extended3 now for every field we add to mam?

  405. lovetox

    though if i look at pubsub i guess thats not a problem

  406. lovetox

    ^^

  407. Zash

    https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0030.html#appendix-revs > Version 2.5_rc3_ What's up with an rc version?

  408. Zash

    For 2 years?

  409. Ge0rG

    Zash: yes

  410. Zash

    wat

  411. pep.

    Let's all show openssl how much we care about them adding SRVName and xmppAddr support to `openssl x509`: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/9950 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/9951

  412. pep.

    :)

  413. Zash

    Step 3: Reopen https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/1309

  414. pep.

    Don't we need to fix the CA/B stuff before?

  415. Zash

    Boulder, the software, could support it. Imagine if the XSF ran an XMPP-only CA (again). :)

  416. Zash

    Doesn't mean Let's Encrypt has to have that feature enabled in production.

  417. Zash

    That part would probably require fighting the CA/B forum

  418. pep.

    Right. I guess we can do both at the same time

  419. pep.

    Pay for lobbies to change CA/B stuff, and implement opt-in support in boulder

  420. MattJ

    lovetox: I don't intend to add an extended2, but move to draft

  421. MattJ

    And the field request wouldn't cover the page flipping feature

  422. pep.

    MattJ, move to draft doesn't prevent MAM42 from adding #extended2, or #extended38

  423. pep.

    That you add it in 313 or in another XEP, it's the same to me

  424. MattJ

    I originally planned another XEP, but it makes more sense here

  425. MattJ

    More than prefs did

  426. Zash

    XEPlosion

  427. pep.

    in sasl anon, what's the "trace" for? If the client want to optionally give some fingerprint info? (that can't really be trusted I guess as it's not specified(?)

  428. Zash

    In the olden days you'd put youn email there, for some reason.

  429. Zash

    In the olden days you'd put your email there, for some reason.

  430. pep.

    That's up to the service require such info I guess?

  431. Zash

    IIRC that's what anonymous FTP sites said in their greeting messages decades ago.

  432. Link Mauve

    Daniel, Zash, sonny, https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/594/commits/f4b561b7cc80a890076e6b37c5393db0eddc6915

  433. Link Mauve

    For now it’s a text version, but I expect to use badges instead once we want to integrate it on the website.

  434. Ge0rG

    It's not 2020 yet...

  435. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, I can move back to 2019 if we want to enable the badges before that.

  436. Link Mauve

    But I think targetting 2020 might be a good idea.

  437. Link Mauve

    Ugh, when we accepted https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/812 I forgot to check that xs:unsignedInteger exists: turns out it doesn’t.

  438. Link Mauve

    This PR probably wanted to use xs:unsignedInt instead.

  439. Link Mauve

    I’m sorry about that. /o\

  440. Link Mauve

    vanitasvitae, ↑

  441. vanitasvitae

    Oh you're right.