XSF Discussion - 2020-02-25


  1. raghavgururajan has left
  2. andy has left
  3. raghavgururajan has joined
  4. raghavgururajan has left
  5. Neustradamus has joined
  6. raghavgururajan has joined
  7. Neustradamus has left
  8. Neustradamus has joined
  9. Neustradamus has left
  10. raghavgururajan has left
  11. calvin has left
  12. raghavgururajan has joined
  13. Neustradamus has joined
  14. Neustradamus has left
  15. raghavgururajan has left
  16. Alex__ has left
  17. karoshi has left
  18. pdurbin has left
  19. pdurbin has joined
  20. raghavgururajan has joined
  21. pdurbin has left
  22. raghavgururajan has left
  23. raghavgururajan has joined
  24. raghavgururajan has left
  25. raghavgururajan has joined
  26. calvin has joined
  27. arc has left
  28. arc has joined
  29. mukt2 has joined
  30. david has left
  31. debacle has left
  32. david has joined
  33. mukt2 has left
  34. lovetox has left
  35. wurstsalat has left
  36. arc has left
  37. arc has joined
  38. lovetox has joined
  39. arc has left
  40. arc has joined
  41. pdurbin has joined
  42. Yagiza has joined
  43. lovetox has left
  44. arc has left
  45. arc has joined
  46. pdurbin has left
  47. Marc has left
  48. vanitasvitae has left
  49. lskdjf has left
  50. vanitasvitae has joined
  51. arc has left
  52. adiaholic has left
  53. adiaholic has joined
  54. calvin has left
  55. pdurbin has joined
  56. mukt2 has joined
  57. adiaholic has left
  58. adiaholic has joined
  59. mukt2 has left
  60. serge90 has left
  61. serge90 has joined
  62. mukt2 has joined
  63. lovetox has joined
  64. andy has joined
  65. winfried has left
  66. winfried has joined
  67. mukt2 has left
  68. mukt2 has joined
  69. lorddavidiii has joined
  70. mimi89999 has left
  71. mimi89999 has joined
  72. pdurbin has left
  73. debxwoody has joined
  74. pdurbin has joined
  75. raghavgururajan has left
  76. mukt2 has left
  77. raghavgururajan has joined
  78. raghavgururajan has left
  79. Tobias has joined
  80. mukt2 has joined
  81. Nekit has left
  82. wurstsalat has joined
  83. Nekit has joined
  84. mukt2 has left
  85. mukt2 has joined
  86. Marc has joined
  87. karoshi has joined
  88. lorddavidiii has left
  89. lorddavidiii has joined
  90. lorddavidiii has left
  91. pdurbin has left
  92. lorddavidiii has joined
  93. lorddavidiii has left
  94. pdurbin has joined
  95. lorddavidiii has joined
  96. lorddavidiii has left
  97. lorddavidiii has joined
  98. lorddavidiii has left
  99. emus has joined
  100. mimi89999 has left
  101. mimi89999 has joined
  102. raghavgururajan has joined
  103. lorddavidiii has joined
  104. winfried has left
  105. winfried has joined
  106. debxwoody has left
  107. mukt2 has left
  108. mukt2 has joined
  109. debxwoody has joined
  110. debxwoody has left
  111. lorddavidiii has left
  112. lorddavidiii has joined
  113. Marc has left
  114. mukt2 has left
  115. Marc has joined
  116. Shell has joined
  117. Steve Kille has left
  118. Steve Kille has joined
  119. Shell has left
  120. Shell has joined
  121. Shell has left
  122. Shell has joined
  123. eevvoor has joined
  124. Shell has left
  125. Shell has joined
  126. andrey.g has left
  127. Shell has left
  128. Shell has joined
  129. mukt2 has joined
  130. mukt2 has left
  131. mukt2 has joined
  132. LNJ has joined
  133. eevvoor has left
  134. eevvoor has joined
  135. mukt2 has left
  136. andrey.g has joined
  137. eevvoor has left
  138. Dele Olajide has joined
  139. mukt2 has joined
  140. adiaholic has left
  141. adiaholic has joined
  142. Alex__ has joined
  143. krauq has left
  144. krauq has joined
  145. debacle has joined
  146. mukt2 has left
  147. pdurbin has left
  148. eevvoor has joined
  149. marc has joined
  150. eevvoor has left
  151. Alex__ has left
  152. Shell has left
  153. mukt2 has joined
  154. winfried has left
  155. winfried has joined
  156. winfried has left
  157. winfried has joined
  158. mukt2 has left
  159. winfried has left
  160. winfried has joined
  161. raghavgururajan has left
  162. mukt2 has joined
  163. eevvoor has joined
  164. Alex__ has joined
  165. emus has left
  166. mukt2 has left
  167. mukt2 has joined
  168. emus has joined
  169. karoshi has left
  170. karoshi has joined
  171. marc has left
  172. eevvoor has left
  173. mukt2 has left
  174. Alex__ has left
  175. lorddavidiii has left
  176. Shell has joined
  177. lorddavidiii has joined
  178. adiaholic has left
  179. adiaholic has joined
  180. lorddavidiii has left
  181. lorddavidiii has joined
  182. lorddavidiii has left
  183. lorddavidiii has joined
  184. Shell has left
  185. Shell has joined
  186. lorddavidiii has left
  187. mukt2 has joined
  188. lorddavidiii has joined
  189. debacle has left
  190. Shell has left
  191. Shell has joined
  192. lorddavidiii has left
  193. lorddavidiii has joined
  194. lorddavidiii has left
  195. mukt2 has left
  196. lorddavidiii has joined
  197. mukt2 has joined
  198. LNJ has left
  199. larma has left
  200. adiaholic has left
  201. adiaholic has joined
  202. waqas has left
  203. mukt2 has left
  204. Nekit has left
  205. larma has joined
  206. pdurbin has joined
  207. paul has left
  208. Nekit has joined
  209. Shell has left
  210. Shell has joined
  211. Shell has left
  212. Shell has joined
  213. paul has joined
  214. pdurbin has left
  215. lorddavidiii has left
  216. lskdjf has joined
  217. lorddavidiii has joined
  218. lskdjf has left
  219. lskdjf has joined
  220. paul has left
  221. paul has joined
  222. debacle has joined
  223. lorddavidiii has left
  224. Shell has left
  225. Shell has joined
  226. lorddavidiii has joined
  227. mukt2 has joined
  228. paul has left
  229. lorddavidiii has left
  230. lorddavidiii has joined
  231. Shell has left
  232. Shell has joined
  233. marc has joined
  234. mukt2 has left
  235. lorddavidiii has left
  236. Dele Olajide has left
  237. Dele Olajide has joined
  238. lorddavidiii has joined
  239. Shell has left
  240. Shell has joined
  241. MattJ How do client devs feel about implementing references of type=mention?
  242. Kev Feel in what sense?
  243. MattJ Why does (afaict) only a single client support it right now?
  244. Shell has left
  245. Shell has joined
  246. Kev I think it's particularly useful for servers too, when generating notifications.
  247. MattJ Right, I'm involved in such a project
  248. Kev But I'm intending Swift does them when we get to it.
  249. MattJ But if you use most XMPP clients with this server, no notifications are generated
  250. jonas’ MattJ, I don’t feel particularly enthusiastic about implementing anything References until my comments from three years ago are at least addressed
  251. jonas’ and by addressed, in this context, I mean "replied to", because not even that happende (beyond "someone will rewrite the XEP soon so no point in dealing with this right now")
  252. jonas’ oh, just two years: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-March/034559.html
  253. MattJ Is it related to character counting? or something else?
  254. MattJ I thought the character counting stuff reached some kind of consensus
  255. paul has joined
  256. paul has left
  257. MattJ and that was the primary blocker in my mind
  258. Kev MattJ: I mean when the server is generating push notifications, it can do so based on the presence of a mention reference. As well.
  259. paul has joined
  260. Kev MattJ: Jonas also (sensibly) wanted extensible reference types (mentions etc.).
  261. MattJ Kev, you mean "as well as text scanning"?
  262. Kev MattJ: I mean as well as the receiving client generating notifications based on something having put mentions in.
  263. MattJ It's a tough sell for me to add a feature that emails someone with the nick "max" every time someone asks "what's the max number of items this can handle?"
  264. Shell has left
  265. Shell has joined
  266. MattJ Their current stance is "Why don't XMPP clients support mentions? The ecosystem seems terrible"
  267. Kev I don't think I'm suggesting that, am I?
  268. adiaholic has left
  269. adiaholic has joined
  270. Kev I'm not intentionally doing so, at least!
  271. Zash What's this then MattJ ?
  272. MattJ Zash, only works if I'm online and connected, and their primary client is a web app
  273. MattJ and I don't want to use it, but I can't notify people when I send them a message :)
  274. MattJ (and this isn't just about me - they /want/ to say they support arbitrary XMPP clients)
  275. MattJ But if they advertise that as a feature, people will wonder why nobody answers them when they mention them
  276. DebXWoody has left
  277. Ge0rG has left
  278. DebXWoody has joined
  279. Ge0rG has joined
  280. Shell has left
  281. Shell has joined
  282. mukt2 has joined
  283. Zash Cry and implement some server-side heuristics? Like only looking for nicknames at the start of lines
  284. Dele Olajide has left
  285. Dele Olajide has joined
  286. Shell has left
  287. Shell has joined
  288. Shell has left
  289. LNJ has joined
  290. Shell has joined
  291. adiaholic has left
  292. adiaholic has joined
  293. adiaholic has left
  294. adiaholic has joined
  295. lorddavidiii has left
  296. lorddavidiii has joined
  297. calvin has joined
  298. Shell has left
  299. Shell has joined
  300. pdurbin has joined
  301. DebXWoody has left
  302. Shell has left
  303. Shell has joined
  304. mimi89999 has left
  305. mimi89999 has joined
  306. calvin has left
  307. DebXWoody has joined
  308. goffi has joined
  309. Shell has left
  310. winfried has left
  311. winfried has joined
  312. pdurbin has left
  313. Shell has joined
  314. mukt2 has left
  315. Shell has left
  316. Shell has joined
  317. mukt2 has joined
  318. debxwoody has joined
  319. mukt2 has left
  320. mukt2 has joined
  321. Alex I have started memberbot for collection votes on our current Q1-2020 application period
  322. adiaholic has left
  323. winfried has left
  324. winfried has joined
  325. Shell has left
  326. Shell has joined
  327. Neustradamus has joined
  328. Jeybe has joined
  329. Jeybe Hey all. What XEP does a Client / Server need to support for sending and receiving if a message was read?
  330. Jeybe Is this done within XEP-0085: Chat State Notifications or is there something seperate / additional?
  331. calvin has joined
  332. Wojtek has joined
  333. jonas’ Jeybe, XEP-0184 (Message Receipts)
  334. Jeybe Isn't that just a delivery receipt and no info about whether a message was read or not?
  335. Jeybe Or do I get that wrong
  336. pep. Alex, thanks
  337. Kev Jeybe: You're correct. People typically use 333 for that.
  338. Kev https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0333.html
  339. jubalh has left
  340. jubalh has joined
  341. calvin has left
  342. calvin has joined
  343. Jeybe Kev: Ah, thank you. Many clients seem to support this, although it's a deferred spec. Just no one who is able or willing to finish it correctly?
  344. pep. Deferred doesn't especially mean unfinished
  345. pep. When do we kill this state again :x
  346. Kev Jeybe: That's a reasonable approximation of a description, yes :)
  347. Jeybe Kev: Ok, thanks
  348. Douglas Terabyte has left
  349. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  350. mukt2 has left
  351. Douglas Terabyte has left
  352. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  353. Max has left
  354. jubalh has left
  355. jubalh has joined
  356. Max has joined
  357. Shell has left
  358. jonas’ Jeybe: sorry, I misread your message and thought you wrote "received" instead of read
  359. calvin has left
  360. Marc has left
  361. Marc has joined
  362. Guus memberbot is online for member applications for Q1. If you read this, you might as well cast your votes now. 🙂
  363. jonas’ emus: re https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Edward_Maurer_Application_2020
  364. jonas’ you say you work in the wind power industry, yet you claim no company affiliation
  365. jonas’ I don't think that's right
  366. emus The company uses.....Skype f B. 😃🎉🎊
  367. jonas’ I'm not sure that matters
  368. emus I`m saying I apply as a private person.
  369. jonas’ my understanding is that we have limits on the share of members per company
  370. Kev Correct.
  371. emus What do expect from me?
  372. jonas’ I think you can only apply as individual in general
  373. emus Ehm, so I did?
  374. jonas’ what I'm saying is that you're still affiliated with your employer and need to say so
  375. jonas’ I *think*
  376. jonas’ that's at least how I understand the rules and how I wrote my own application
  377. Guus emus: basically, to avoid companies trying to take over the world, starting with the XSF, we'd like to make sure that the number of members do not all affiliate to the same company. Just mention the name of your company, and all is good.
  378. goffi has left
  379. Guus Bylaws have the details, if you're interested.
  380. Ge0rG https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html#mandatory > Any affiliations, as described within the final clause of the XSF Bylaws, Section 2.1. Note that this is not limited to employment, but must include it.
  381. pep. "Note that this is not limited to employment" interesting
  382. jonas’ I also disclosed my university when I was still a student
  383. jonas’ (for that reason)
  384. Ge0rG and the bylaws: > An applicant for membership may not be admitted if, at the time of application or consideration, fifteen percent (15%) of the Members of the Corporation are employed by or represent the same corporation or organization as that corporation or organization which employs the applicant or is represented by the applicant.
  385. fippo there goes the evil plan to hire a lot of contractors and take over the xsf...
  386. pep. fippo, yeah, the bylaws saw you coming!!
  387. Kev I'm sure you have backup evil plans.
  388. emus Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself. Guys, that what I voluntarily has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused....
  389. calvin has joined
  390. jonas’ > memberbot is online for member applications for Q1. If you read this, you might as well cast your votes now. 🙂 I set out to prove that I can read this message on my mobile, yet voting would be impractical. Instead, I completed the voting process, so, well played.
  391. emus Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself. Guys, that what I voluntarily do in XMPP has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused....
  392. Ge0rG emus: humans are often influenced by their employers in more or less sublte ways, therefore it's required to tell the XSF who your employer is
  393. adiaholic has joined
  394. jonas’ > Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself. > Guys, that what I voluntarily has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused.... same for me. doesn't change the bylaws rules tho.
  395. Guus > I set out to prove that I can read this message on my mobile, yet voting would be impractical. Instead, I completed the voting process, so, well played. Muwhahahaa
  396. emus Im a working student...
  397. emus No, then I refuse my application.
  398. jonas’ emus: I'm not particularly fond of those rules either. But I understand that they are useful to keep the XSF independent.
  399. pep. I understand the XSF has to know about it, I still don't understand why this has to be made public
  400. lorddavidiii has left
  401. jonas’ emus: on the bright side, nothing of what you stated in your application strictly requires membership
  402. lorddavidiii has joined
  403. jonas’ pep.: maybe because nobody asked for it to be private yet? sounds like a board topic to fix that.
  404. mukt2 has joined
  405. emus I got asked to apply, because some appeciated what I did 🤷‍♂️ So I said, yes is fine
  406. Zash I think we've mentioned that it's probably doable to have only the Secretary know
  407. pep. jonas’, yeah I encouraged him, and I did completely forget this "detail". Nothing requires him to be a member indeed, it's mostly to show interest
  408. pep. jonas’, I don't think enough people care yet, so proposing this to board would be a waste of time and maybe even harmful. I'm happy to lead this if I'm proven wrong
  409. emus I can tell privately where work to someone responsible, but I would not like to put it online.
  410. jonas’ pep.: to be honest, I don't like this requirement either. It did put me off back then for a moment.
  411. pep. Note that this topic has come up every last membership vote I think
  412. jonas’ so I'd support a motion for defining a way to declare affiliations privately
  413. lskdjf > pep.: maybe because nobody asked for it to be private yet? sounds like a board topic to fix that. actually there have been multiple people asking for private information like full name and employer not to be in a public wiki anymore. So yeah if that could be brought up with board, that would be nice.
  414. jonas’ did it? I only recall the anonymity thing
  415. pep. Well this kind of mitigates the anonymity issue
  416. pep. Anonymity is not an on/off switch as you know :)
  417. jonas’ does it?
  418. Ge0rG I still think that for a public standards organizations, it's important to have public information about the members and their affiliations
  419. emus Actually I dropped, saying in which industry I work, to even more say that this has no relation 😅
  420. pep. emus, I'm sorry but that doesn't help :/
  421. Guus I'm with Ge0rG
  422. pep. I'm not
  423. lskdjf > I still think that for a public standards organizations, it's important to have public information about the members and their affiliations I think you can argue that for people that have been voted into council, board and the secretary. however, not for normal members.
  424. emus But does everyone here dropped exactly where their work or study?
  425. Ge0rG lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs
  426. jonas’ emus: check the applications
  427. emus > I think you can argue that for people that have been voted into council, board and the secretary. however, not for normal members. Yes, I wonder as well
  428. pep. Ge0rG, that's diverting
  429. lskdjf Ge0rG, I'm aware of that. What's your point?
  430. emus > emus: check the applications What exactly?
  431. jonas’ > lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonomously
  432. Ge0rG lskdjf: membership is responsible for voting people into public positions, so I think the transparency requirements extend here
  433. jonas’ > lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonymously
  434. pep. members don't have to submit XEPs either
  435. lskdjf > though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonomously jonas’ it's not allowed according to ... xep 001 or so
  436. jonas’ > What exactly? emus, just open them and you'll see that people disclose their employer
  437. adiaholic has left
  438. jonas’ it's on my user page for example
  439. winfried has left
  440. winfried has joined
  441. emus Will check again, but havent recognised that as a mandatory point
  442. emus also not that everyone was telling
  443. lskdjf > lskdjf: membership is responsible for voting people into public positions, so I think the transparency requirements extend here Ge0rG Legislations require a presitent of a country to make all sorts of information public. That doesn't mean that the voting directory should be online.
  444. Guus It is mandatory. Check the bylaws. If not everyone included the information, that was an omission in their application.
  445. marc has left
  446. jonas’ reading the bylaws of the organization you're trying to join seems like a good idea either way
  447. emus Okay guys, lets making simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.
  448. pep. jonas’, so yeah I can bring that to board, but it's likely to get shot down :)
  449. Ge0rG lskdjf: I'm aware of that. What's your point?
  450. emus Okay guys, lets make itsimple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.
  451. emus Okay guys, lets make it simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.
  452. jonas’ Alex, cc, see emus message above
  453. lskdjf Ge0rG, 😛 well, I was drawing an analogy.
  454. pep. emus, sorry, and thanks :)
  455. emus > emus, sorry, and thanks :) No problem
  456. pep. Also why I think the XSF won't change as long as we don't let new people like this in.
  457. emus XMPP wondering why no one gives a shit about it.... 🤔
  458. lskdjf yeah xsf tends to be a bunch of people that "have been doing things this way forever and want it to stay that way" at times.
  459. emus deleted
  460. emus That meant to be in the wrong chat
  461. Guus wow.
  462. Guus we didn't even start to debate this.
  463. Guus but, sure. We're not open to change, apparently.
  464. Ge0rG lskdjf: I'm only part of the XSF for five years now, and I think that the current requirements for becoming a member are adequate.
  465. emus Didn`t meant to bother you procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway
  466. mukt2 has left
  467. emus Didn`t meant to bother your procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway
  468. Ge0rG I'm pretty sure that it's possible to ask Board for a change to these rules without being a member, though.
  469. pep. But it's not possible to vote
  470. marc has joined
  471. Guus emus: that's on you. We have very public records and bylaws.
  472. Guus don't blame us for not doing your homework.
  473. emus > emus: that's on you. We have very public records and bylaws. > don't blame us for not doing your homework. I don't blame and I read it of course, still missed that spot
  474. winfried has left
  475. winfried has joined
  476. lskdjf has left
  477. Guus I'm going to drop out of this conversation. It is ticking a nerve, which doesn't help me being a useful participant.
  478. pep. Guus, I think that's on us. That could be made a bit more obvious. https://xmpp.org/community/membership.html this doesn't mention anything about the requirements, it just links to thing
  479. pep. (yes yes we can all PR)
  480. winfried has left
  481. winfried has joined
  482. Daniel Why is this suddenly coming up?
  483. Ge0rG There is obviously a trade-off between allowing people who need their private information protected, but also anonymous trolls, vs. the transparency of a public and open standards organization.
  484. Ge0rG Daniel: because it's election time
  485. emus > Why is this suddenly coming up? Because I havent named my company, as I missed that requirement, but also doesnt want to put the information online
  486. Daniel Yes. But it was never a big topic before
  487. pep. it has
  488. pep. multiple times
  489. Ge0rG Daniel: anonymous participation has been a topic before, some times.
  490. Daniel Yeah. I was more referring to the affiliations part
  491. calvin has left
  492. emus But its not anonymous anymore actually
  493. pep. This is not full anonymity towards the XSF mind
  494. emus once I put my name
  495. jonas’ muc_semianon
  496. pep. kinda
  497. Daniel Tbh I'm not really sure what affiliation means in the context of my being self employed
  498. pep. You have to disclose every single one of your clients!
  499. pep. hrhr
  500. emus 😅
  501. pep. But hmm, tbh, I think that's what "Note that this is not limited to employment" means
  502. pdurbin has joined
  503. Daniel I'm sure that at least 50 percent of my customers aren't happy with me doing that
  504. pep. I'm sure of that :)
  505. adiaholic has joined
  506. littlesmiley has joined
  507. Kev The "not company" thing is because e.g. most OSS projects aren't company-based within XMPP.
  508. pdurbin has left
  509. Kev But if 30 people working for different companies, all of whom were working on Swift were to apply, the XSF should care.
  510. larma > It is mandatory. Check the bylaws. If not everyone included the information, that was an omission in their application. I think it's funny how everyone has assumptions what is in the bylaws, but nobody ever actually seems to verify them...
  511. mukt2 has joined
  512. larma > to be eligible for membership, a person, corporation, organization, or other entity must complete a written membership application in such form as shall be adopted by the Board of Directors from time to time. The substance of such membership application must be included in a notice to the Members of the meeting at which such membership application is considered. > The Secretary shall have general charge of the membership records of the Corporation and shall keep, at the principal office of the Corporation, a record of the Members showing the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number and electronic mail address of each Member.
  513. emus > The "not company" thing is because e.g. most OSS projects aren't company-based within XMPP. > But if 30 people working for different companies, all of whom were working on Swift were to apply, the XSF should care. I intended to tell the branch where I work, but also that it has (unfortunatly) nothing to do with XMPP. But yes, till then I didnt knew about that requirement
  514. littlesmiley has left
  515. larma Nowhere in the bylaws it says that things go public at all (beside board members). Members receive the "substance" of the application (that doesn't need to include company if that's not substantial), the membership records are with the secretary. Of course board can decide to only accept public membership applications in the wiki that include company details, but it's *not* in the bylaws, don't claim that.
  516. debxwoody has left
  517. neshtaxmpp has left
  518. jubalh has left
  519. jubalh has joined
  520. winfried has left
  521. winfried has joined
  522. MattJ I haven't read the entire discussion, but yeah, I'm in the category or "Self-employed and not going to dump a list of my clients in the wiki"
  523. MattJ I haven't read the entire discussion, but yeah, I'm in the category of "Self-employed and not going to dump a list of my clients in the wiki"
  524. littlesmiley has joined
  525. adiaholic has left
  526. winfried has left
  527. winfried has joined
  528. adiaholic has joined
  529. j.r has left
  530. eevvoor has joined
  531. mukt2 has left
  532. mukt2 has joined
  533. goffi has joined
  534. lorddavidiii has left
  535. winfried has left
  536. winfried has joined
  537. lorddavidiii has joined
  538. winfried has left
  539. winfried has joined
  540. Alex We had many similar applications in the past where people were just saying that they are self employed or apply as an individual. Because he is saying that his work is not realted to XMPP at all I did not pay further attention. If this is a problem and you think it violates the bylaws (which everyone reads difefrent ;-) ) I can ask him to disclose with employer directly to me only
  541. lorddavidiii has left
  542. jonas’ Alex, emus retracted the application
  543. mukt2 has left
  544. lorddavidiii has joined
  545. Alex it is still on the Wiki, don't think we defined somewhere on how to retract an application ;-)
  546. mukt2 has joined
  547. emus jonas’: I retraced, as understood that was mandatory. I am fine to tell Alex privately where I work, if that is within the process
  548. moparisthebest I don't think I've ever listed my employer either and no one said anything, my employer has nothing to do with xmpp or even chat
  549. emus as said
  550. emus I am.okay with other option
  551. adiaholic has left
  552. moparisthebest I wouldn't want to list it on the wiki either, my employer is kind of odd about "don't mention us on social media or anything that might be construed as you representing us" but I wouldn't mind telling Alex , just no one has ever asked
  553. jubalh has left
  554. jubalh has joined
  555. j.r has joined
  556. larma MattJ, there is no reason by the bylaws to disclose clients of a self-employed person. You'd only need to disclose to board/secretary when you are employed by or represent a company so they can apply the maximum 15% rule.
  557. ralphm The whole idea behind it is just that we want to prevent companies to be overrepresented in our membership.
  558. ralphm Right
  559. MattJ I totally get the idea behind it
  560. MattJ But from the day it was first proposed I said I didn't see how it would actually work
  561. MattJ I've never listed anything and nobody has ever complained :)
  562. pep. It doesn't seem to be applied very much anyway
  563. ralphm I don't there is a problem to solve right now. If someone finds that the 15% rule can be argued to be broken, we can go back and fix it.
  564. moparisthebest Nothing stops anyone from just lying, or simply not putting anything, apparently :)
  565. larma The assumption seems to be that everyone would be so kind to mention company info if it was relevant
  566. littlesmiley has left
  567. littlesmiley has joined
  568. pep. moparisthebest, yeah that's true of every info you give anyway :)
  569. ralphm I think self-employed is totally fine.
  570. mukt2 has left
  571. MattJ If I (hypothetically) did a 3-month contract for Isode (picking one well-represented company in the XSF community) in the middle of my membership period, what should happen?
  572. ralphm Lies will be caught up with, I don't see a problem.
  573. ralphm MattJ, we'd talk about it
  574. MattJ and it would be my fault if I forgot to mention it?
  575. neshtaxmpp has joined
  576. larma MattJ, are you representing their interest when making use of your XSF membership rights? If no, then it doesn't matter
  577. MattJ Does it specify anywhere that I have to update the XSF if my status with a company changes between applications?
  578. jonas’ if my employer enters a three month contract to build infrastructure for, say, NATO messaging, would I have to disclose that?
  579. winfried has left
  580. winfried has joined
  581. MattJ and how do I know which companies I need to notify the XSF about, and which I don't?
  582. MattJ Obviously I've been around a while and could guess a few, but it seems pretty arbitrary
  583. jonas’ if my employer enters a three month contract to build infrastructure for, say, NATO messaging, would I have to disclose that (assuming that I’m assigned to work on that)?
  584. MattJ If the honest answer is "it's fine, you'll know if you're (close to) breaking the rules and we trust everyone to be honest" then I'm fine with the status quo
  585. pep. Of some putting their affiliations and some not? And asking every new member to? :p
  586. moparisthebest assuming it was actually enforced, I'm not sure I see any advantage anyway, if one company wanted to hijack messaging standards they could just start their own standards organization and do it anyway, maybe call themselves Matrix or something?
  587. calvin has joined
  588. ralphm MattJ: your last statement is my vantage point
  589. pep. I'm curious what you think is the status quo though
  590. mukt2 has joined
  591. MattJ pep., you just summed it up :)
  592. pep. I don't like this
  593. pep. Why would we force it on new members while not on others
  594. MattJ We historically haven't forced it
  595. pep. Seems pretty random to me
  596. david has left
  597. Kev For my point of view, I think having some protection against representation/flooding is worthwhile. I'm fine with that protection not being public (although I think it's useful to default to public where people are willing). I think some guidance on what to disclose would be useful.
  598. MattJ We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it
  599. ralphm The status quo is that every few days other parts of our bylaws are scrutinized to see if there's an issue. I think it would be better to focus on things when there's an actual problem in need dire need for solving.
  600. Ge0rG If we don't strictly enforce this rule, how are we supposed to prevent being hijacked?
  601. MattJ Ge0rG, it beats not having a rule and then not being able to enforce it when you need to
  602. emus > If we don't strictly enforce this rule, how are we supposed to prevent being hijacked? I mean, one could also lie... you would have to proof it anyway or?
  603. david has joined
  604. pep. emus, what MattJ said.
  605. Ge0rG MattJ: okay, I can see that.
  606. calvin has left
  607. emus If you agree, I can tell Alex, or anyone else privately, as long that kept privately
  608. pep. I also think it's a worthwile rule to have. I'm happy to rework the implementation
  609. littlesmiley has left
  610. littlesmiley has joined
  611. Ge0rG So maybe somebody should change XEP-0345 into "affiliations can be made public, and must be communicated to the Secretary otherwise"
  612. emus (I also understand that XSF fears to get hijacked of course)
  613. pep. Ge0rG, 345 doesn't actually say this information has to be public does it?
  614. pep. ah it does
  615. pep. Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assume in the document
  616. alameyo has left
  617. alameyo has joined
  618. pep. Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assumed in the document
  619. Ge0rG pep.: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html#mandatory
  620. larma Ge0rG, it says applicants must provide, not to whom
  621. pep. That doesn't say public. It talks about giving info to the Secretary and allowing members to vote
  622. Ge0rG > As a secondary purpose, it also allows the XSF members to make an informed decision when voting to accept applications
  623. pep. yes
  624. Jeybe has left
  625. Ge0rG that implies that members will see this.
  626. pep. Sure
  627. pep. That's already better than "On a public wiki"
  628. Ge0rG and §3 says it has to be in the wiki
  629. Ge0rG pep.: I'm sure you can provide a better wording as a PR :D
  630. pep. I'm working on it
  631. ralphm emus, there is no fear. This rule exists so we can take action in case a company is overrepresented based on that rule, instead of some vague notion of 'too much'.
  632. littlesmiley has left
  633. littlesmiley has joined
  634. jonas’ 15:51:07 MattJ> We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it I did, today.
  635. littlesmiley has left
  636. littlesmiley has joined
  637. MattJ I didn't scroll back that far, I guess :)
  638. MattJ I'm definitely against picking on random people
  639. emus > emus, there is no fear. This rule exists so we can take action in case a company is overrepresented based on that rule, instead of some vague notion of 'too much'. Ok, I understand
  640. jonas’ I wasn’t aware I was picking on anyone in particular. I admit that I probably don’t scan applications of "famous" people like Dave as thoroughly as I do for others, though
  641. jonas’ I simply assumed it was an oversight
  642. jonas’ (and, to be frank, I also assumed that Alex would screen the applications, as he said he also keeps tab on the 15% rule at some point)
  643. larma jonas’, he can keep tab on the 15% even without getting company names 😉
  644. littlesmiley has left
  645. littlesmiley has joined
  646. larma like, we currrently have one applicant that works in a company in the wind power industry and no other member that does, so that implies his company is not overrepresented ;)
  647. ralphm Yes, until we only have 8 members, which is yet another problem.
  648. ralphm I'm happy for Alex to continue doing what he's been doing and if someone at some point feels a company is overrepresented we can look into it.
  649. serge90 has left
  650. adiaholic has joined
  651. Alex as @ralphm said. The ruile is there to take action if we thing a componany is overpresented or someone is raising concerns with that. I am not compiling and verifiying the stats after every election.
  652. larma ralphm, +1 - as long as we make sure that applicants that obviously are not overrepresenting a company don't feel any repression to apply I see no issue. It just feels very absurd to not accept an active community member like emus purely based on the fact that we don't know the company even if we do know that it is not overrepresented.
  653. pep. Where is a good venue that's not standards because it's about the membership, but also not members@ because that's not opened to non-members (right?)
  654. Marc has left
  655. Marc has joined
  656. littlesmiley has left
  657. littlesmiley has joined
  658. adiaholic has left
  659. Zash Organizational meta-discussions?
  660. Alex @emus exposed his employer to me. So I have it in my records
  661. j.r has left
  662. adiaholic has joined
  663. pep. Zash, I'd like a place where interested people can also join the discussion. A place where they can say things like "yeah if you do that I'd be interested to join"
  664. emus > @emus exposed his employer to me. So I have it in my records Ok, and if someone really really needs to know, I can tell him or her as well
  665. eevvoor has left
  666. serge90 has joined
  667. adiaholic has left
  668. mukt2 has left
  669. eevvoor has joined
  670. j.r has joined
  671. adiaholic has joined
  672. eevvoor has left
  673. mukt2 has joined
  674. littlesmiley has left
  675. Jeybe has joined
  676. winfried has left
  677. winfried has joined
  678. neshtaxmpp has left
  679. matkor has left
  680. matkor has joined
  681. mukt2 has left
  682. debacle has left
  683. winfried has left
  684. winfried has joined
  685. Jeybe has left
  686. mukt2 has joined
  687. Jeybe has joined
  688. vanitasvitae never disclosed their job either :P
  689. vanitasvitae Am I even real? 😱
  690. Zash Are birds real?
  691. pep. I only see pixels
  692. jonas’ I see fragged people
  693. Ge0rG I don't even see the pixels. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead.
  694. jonas’ damn, that was the better reference
  695. pdurbin has joined
  696. jonas’ just proves that it’s been too long since I saw The Matrix
  697. Ge0rG marc: I've initiated a standards@ thread on the 0401 change, but there was less activity than I anticipated. How can we move it forward now?
  698. neshtaxmpp has joined
  699. winfried has left
  700. winfried has joined
  701. winfried has left
  702. winfried has joined
  703. jonas’ "just do it"
  704. Ge0rG said the person who just did it.
  705. jonas’ ahem.
  706. jonas’ switching hats all the time sure does get confusing
  707. Ge0rG * jonas’ puts on his wizard hat and robe.
  708. jonas’ that’s only on friday nights.
  709. jonas’ and also not a wizard, actually
  710. Ge0rG a lizard, then?
  711. vanitasvitae Level 7 Valor Bard
  712. Steve Kille has left
  713. neshtaxmpp has left
  714. pdurbin has left
  715. Steve Kille has joined
  716. DebXWoody has left
  717. emus > vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P Omg... tbh I read a few application but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵
  718. emus > vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵
  719. DebXWoody has joined
  720. debacle has joined
  721. Zash > The namespace governing this protocol is "http://jabber.org/protocol/commands" (hereafter referred to as x-commands). What the x-?
  722. jonas’ legacy, probably
  723. Zash Hm, can't well-known commands take the dataform in the first step?
  724. eevvoor has joined
  725. vanitasvitae > Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵 Don't blame me for this now :P
  726. Nekit has left
  727. mukt2 has left
  728. marc Ge0rG: what are our options?
  729. mukt2 has joined
  730. emus > Don't blame me for this now :P Everything is your fault!!!1! 😉
  731. neshtaxmpp has joined
  732. winfried has left
  733. Ge0rG marc: you read https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2020-January/036848.html and the reply and decide whether you want to accept the change or not
  734. winfried has joined
  735. Jeybe has left
  736. jonas’ does anyone know how a Last Call email for a Procedural XEP should look like?
  737. jonas’ otherwise I’m going to cook something up
  738. jonas’ (the old tooling did not support this case, neither does the new)
  739. Jeybe has joined
  740. marc Looks like shit on mobile, I'll read it later
  741. Ge0rG marc: yeah :/
  742. jonas’ bahaha
  743. jonas’ man, I should step back from writing emails for today
  744. winfried has left
  745. winfried has joined
  746. Zash Oof, my inbox
  747. jonas’ > URL: http://localhost:8080/extensions/xep-0429.html
  748. jonas’ spot the error ;)
  749. Ge0rG ouch ;)
  750. Zash Hah
  751. Zash jonas’, wait what, vcard4 isn't PEP-backed already?
  752. winfried has left
  753. winfried has joined
  754. adiaholic has left
  755. adiaholic has joined
  756. jonas’ Zash, I checked it, and it didn’t look as if it was
  757. jonas’ <iq from='samizzi@cisco.com/foo' id='bx81v356' to='stpeter@jabber.org' type='get'> <vcard xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0'/> </iq>
  758. jonas’ ``` <iq from='samizzi@cisco.com/foo' id='bx81v356' to='stpeter@jabber.org' type='get'> <vcard xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0'/> </iq> ```
  759. jonas’ that’s not PEP to me
  760. jonas’ it optionally uses PEP events for update notifications
  761. Zash It was PEP-only before, then that was added so that it would work in MUC ... IIRC
  762. jonas’ but it isn’t strictly a PEP node
  763. Marc has left
  764. Syndace has left
  765. Jeybe has left
  766. Syndace has joined
  767. Zash mod_vcard4 in Prosody is just a thin layer over the corresponding PEP node.
  768. Syndace has left
  769. Syndace has joined
  770. Marc has joined
  771. Zash and mod_vcard_legacy which implements 0398 is also a (not so thin) layer over a bunch of PEP nodes
  772. Zash And as I'm trying to figure out how to write, it does respect the individual permission settings of those nodes.
  773. Jeybe has joined
  774. jonas’ you may want to add that to the thread then.
  775. jonas’ because that’s not what the spec says currently ;)
  776. Syndace has left
  777. Marc has left
  778. Marc has joined
  779. jonas’ (and I generally prefer your behaviour)
  780. jonas’ (and I generally prefer your implementation’s behaviour)
  781. Zash That reply is exactly what I'm trying to compose
  782. Syndace has joined
  783. jonas’ :)
  784. Zash I especially enjoy being able to set (or, keep?) the full vcard to access=presence while having the avatar nodes public, which makes it spit out a vcard-temp with only the avatar
  785. jonas’ yeah, that’s the kind of stuff I was thinking about
  786. emus has left
  787. Zash There's a thread on 0292 somewhere btw
  788. emus has joined
  789. Zash That simpler iq syntax doesn't actually help with the MUC thing, since that's afaik an explicit exception for vcard-temp, so you could just as well do the same for a PEP / PubSub query as for a vcard4 iq-get
  790. jonas’ sounds to me as if The Editor™ should re-issue the (expired) LC for '292
  791. marc Ge0rG, I agree with Daniel and I would prefer to use SASL2 even though I'm not familar with SASL2 at all atm
  792. Ge0rG marc: SASL2 was introduced in March 2017, and then... nothing happened
  793. Daniel With me?
  794. Daniel Thank you.
  795. Daniel On what?
  796. Ge0rG Daniel: re XEP-0401
  797. winfried has left
  798. winfried has joined
  799. Ge0rG marc: my reasons to change 0401 were not to make it perfect but to make it easy to integrate today
  800. marc Ge0rG, I know but "we" have lots of problem today because "we" did ugly hacks in the past, no?
  801. marc +s
  802. david has left
  803. Zash It's a hack but there's an Actual Product that uses it, so there's that
  804. Ge0rG marc: yes, but this is a minor hack on top of an existing hack
  805. marc I used data forms in the first place because i though it's the best solution
  806. marc now it seems SASL2 is the "best" solution
  807. Zash SASL2 for the future! :)
  808. winfried has left
  809. winfried has joined
  810. waqas has joined
  811. marc Ge0rG, you argued about complexity during 401 spec development, a hacky solution now and SASL2 later would introduce a shitload of additional and unnecessary complexity on the client and server
  812. Zash too late
  813. marc tbh, I don't know how far away we are from SASL2 :)
  814. marc Zash, hm?
  815. Ge0rG marc: not so much, because SASL2 will be a nice and clean solution to many problems, including token authentication
  816. Zash marc: I mean there are implementations already (of 0401 etc)
  817. marc Ge0rG, yep, but you need backwards compability
  818. marc -s
  819. Ge0rG marc: yes, but you'll also need backward compat between SASL2 and IBR, between SASL2 and normal login, etc
  820. marc Zash, yep, a spec cannot step people from implementing something else ;)
  821. marc Ge0rG, token if SASL2, no token otherwise? :)
  822. Zash I do have some SASL2 code stewing fwiw
  823. Ge0rG marc: no - token via SALS2 or token via IQ if no SASL22
  824. Zash Need ... a client to test with
  825. Dele Olajide has left
  826. Ge0rG Zash: I'd offer help, but... yaxim is not doing SASL directly and instead using Smack, and the current Smack development tree won't work with yaxim
  827. Zash :(
  828. marc Zash, SASL2 code for prosody?
  829. Zash Yes
  830. Dele Olajide has joined
  831. marc Daniel, how much effort is it to implement SASL2 in Conversations?
  832. Zash IIRC the two things I got stuck on was 1) client or something to test with and 2) internal architecture to make it easy to do the things that SASL2 allows
  833. marc Ge0rG, 401 is not important enough for ugly hacks IMO
  834. Daniel marc: I don't know a lot about sasl 2 to say. Probably not a lot
  835. Ge0rG marc: if it's not important, you can accept the ugly hack
  836. marc 432 sounds like a joke from fefe's blog ^^
  837. Zash I'd imagine SASL2 itself to be easy to implement, but as I said, it might take architectural changes to do fancy parallell things
  838. Ge0rG marc: however, I'm convinced that we need easy user onboarding and that 0401 is an important step in that direction
  839. marc Zash, can you give me the link to your SASL2 branch?
  840. Ge0rG marc: ask MattJ about the experience with 0401 at last FOSDEM
  841. mukt2 has left
  842. marc Ge0rG, I already had a working implementation with ejabberd and Conversations, I know that it is nice
  843. marc But I don't want to pollute the protocol with more ugly hacks
  844. jonas’ Zash, I could probably look into implementing SASL2 in aioxmpp if you hand me a server to test with
  845. Ge0rG marc: you had an implementation of 0401 before my change?
  846. marc jonas’, +1
  847. marc Ge0rG, yes?
  848. Ge0rG marc: you need to be more public about your achievements.
  849. marc Ge0rG, IIRC I posted a screencast ;)
  850. Ge0rG marc: ...to where?
  851. marc Ge0rG, even a Gajim implementation!!1!
  852. marc here or in the Conversations group chat
  853. Ge0rG marc: that's not adequate.
  854. Ge0rG People are not reading chat-logs
  855. marc Ge0rG, I'm pretty sure you read it Ôo
  856. Ge0rG Also I'm Very Sad Now, because I changed the spec and got the changed spec implemented in yaxim, prosody and I've heard about it being part of recent Conversations
  857. Ge0rG marc: maybe I'm just getting old
  858. marc Ge0rG, If not I'm very sorry
  859. Ge0rG marc: what's the URL?
  860. Ge0rG Maybe I'll remember when I see it?
  861. Ge0rG Or maybe I should just go offline and become a potato farmer
  862. jonas’ s/potato/tomato/ #louiz
  863. marc It's not online anymore because I reinstalled my infrastructure but let me see if I can find it
  864. Yagiza has left
  865. Ge0rG either way, I was totally unaware of all of that when I made https://yaxim.org/blog/2020/01/31/yaxim-0-dot-9-9-fosdem-edition/
  866. Wojtek has left
  867. LNJ has left
  868. LNJ has joined
  869. marc Ge0rG, found it
  870. winfried has left
  871. winfried has joined
  872. mukt2 has joined
  873. marc Ge0rG, https://blog.zapb.de/assets/xmpp-invite.webm
  874. marc Ge0rG, 1142496 Nov 16 2017 xmpp-invite.webm
  875. emus has left
  876. winfried has left
  877. winfried has joined
  878. Ge0rG marc: okay, I've seen that video back in 2017. Where's the code?
  879. marc Ge0rG, somewhere on my notebook / server
  880. Ge0rG marc: so it never got published?
  881. marc ejabberd implementation got stuck because of an xml element with the same synatx whatever but two different meanings
  882. mukt2 has left
  883. marc this was not possible in ejabberd I was told by zinid
  884. Ge0rG hmh?
  885. marc Ge0rG, I don't remember the details but some element used in 401 and PARS had the same name but different meaning
  886. lorddavidiii has left
  887. Ge0rG the token element?
  888. marc and this couldn't be implemented in ejabberd
  889. marc maybe, yes
  890. adiaholic has left
  891. adiaholic has joined
  892. lorddavidiii has joined
  893. Ge0rG marc: did you submit anything to Conversations or Gajim?
  894. Ge0rG ..or even tell the developers?
  895. Ge0rG Sorry, I'm not trying to offend you, I'm just sad.
  896. mukt2 has joined
  897. marc Daniel was aware of it
  898. winfried has left
  899. winfried has joined
  900. marc The Gajim dudes I don't know
  901. eevvoor has left
  902. david has joined
  903. marc Ge0rG, sorry
  904. marc Zash, what about your SASL2 code?
  905. pdurbin has joined
  906. winfried has left
  907. winfried has joined
  908. Douglas Terabyte has left
  909. winfried has left
  910. winfried has joined
  911. pdurbin has left
  912. littlesmiley has joined
  913. Zash Food takes priority
  914. eevvoor has joined
  915. Dele Olajide has left
  916. Dele Olajide has joined
  917. Dele Olajide has left
  918. Half-Shot[m] has left
  919. winfried has left
  920. winfried has joined
  921. Half-Shot[m] has joined
  922. mukt2 has left
  923. Marc has left
  924. Syndace has left
  925. Marc has joined
  926. Syndace has joined
  927. Syndace has left
  928. Marc has left
  929. Syndace has joined
  930. Marc has joined
  931. Zash marc, jonas’: https://modules.prosody.im/mod_sasl2.html
  932. emus has joined
  933. Marc has left
  934. Marc has joined
  935. marc Zash, wow, not very complex
  936. mukt2 has joined
  937. Zash SASL itself isn't that complicated
  938. Marc has left
  939. Syndace has left
  940. Zash And the logic is mostly handled elsewhere by the same stuff that handles SASL1
  941. Zash That code is just mapping it to the new wire protocol
  942. Zash And notably doesn't do any of the fancy stuff SASL2 is meant to allow
  943. Marc has joined
  944. Syndace has joined
  945. LNJ has left
  946. LNJ has joined
  947. eevvoor has left
  948. Marc has left
  949. Syndace has left
  950. Marc has joined
  951. Syndace has joined
  952. Zash jonas’, sent that vcard compat reply. I hope I finished it.
  953. marc Like tasks?
  954. jonas’ Zash, I know that feel
  955. jonas’ Zash, does vcard4 not contain an avatar?
  956. Zash It can, but why would we when we have '84?
  957. Zash Or what do you mean?
  958. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  959. Zash Avatars are separated out and not included stored in the vcard4 PEP node by the Prosody module.
  960. Zash minus one word
  961. Zash the post-food slowness
  962. !XSF_Martin has left
  963. jonas’ Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar?
  964. !XSF_Martin has joined
  965. jonas’ Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar, separately?
  966. Zash So?
  967. Zash Yes.
  968. jonas’ just for my understanding
  969. Zash You probably had the avatar already to show in the contact list or somesuch.
  970. jonas’ Zash, I was asking from a permission perspective mainly
  971. jonas’ i.e. whether the granularity is consistent between vcard4 and vcard-temp
  972. marc Ge0rG, Zash: how is sasl2 and ibr related? do we always have an authentication (anonymous?) step and then ibr?
  973. Zash jonas’, It should be consistent, yes.
  974. Zash marc, they would be related somehow in some way such that everything is nicer
  975. marc lol
  976. Zash Oh there's https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html too
  977. Zash Wait have we been talking about SASL2 when we should have been talking about IBR2?
  978. Zash Such confuse
  979. marc hm?
  980. Zash IBR2 is what you want for 0401
  981. Zash I think?
  982. marc Probably, who came up with SASL2?
  983. Zash Dunno, was it me or Ge0rG ?
  984. Zash Early connection something 2 that reduces the hackyness of 0401
  985. Nekit has joined
  986. Ge0rG Maybe it was Daniel?
  987. Ge0rG XMPP 2!
  988. marc No bullshit please
  989. winfried has left
  990. winfried has joined
  991. Zash SASL2, IBR2, Routing2, ... MAM2
  992. Zash marc, so, IBR2 is for improved registration flows (ask for random profile details, invite tokens, CAPTCHA etc) and SASL2 is for improved login flow (2FA, required password change, stuff) and reducing roundtrips (auth + bind or 198 resumption in one step)
  993. marc Zash, yep, that's what I thought
  994. marc Zash, is there a IBR2 XEPs?
  995. marc -s
  996. eevvoor has joined
  997. Zash Linked to it above, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html
  998. marc I see
  999. marc But atm I don't see the advantage over regular IBR
  1000. eevvoor has left
  1001. adiaholic has left
  1002. winfried has left
  1003. winfried has joined
  1004. vanitasvitae Suprise Blog Post! https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2020/02/25/how-to-implement-a-xep-for-smack/
  1005. vanitasvitae Fallback Indication was a defenseless victim MWAHAHAHA!!!
  1006. emus I read in the Application Wiki again. And I saw the list there and got reminded that I read that point about the company of course for the application, but didn't felt related to it. So I didn't actually thought about nameing it (and of course for privacy reasons). Further, I thought it would be mandatory only if you work in a company that has any interest or relation to XMPP topics. So, maybe that should be cleared out in the future, that, where ever you work as individual (StarBucks or Microsoft) you have to put it to the application.
  1007. emus > Suprise Blog Post! > https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2020/02/25/how-to-implement-a-xep-for-smack/ Can you drop it to the march newsletter:
  1008. emus ?
  1009. pep. ugh I hadn't realized Fallback Indication had been accepted..
  1010. pep. vanitasvitae, I know it's "just an example" but this is a bad use of 428, considering there's already EME (0380) :/
  1011. pep. And we all know people just look at examples
  1012. pdurbin has joined
  1013. vanitasvitae yeah thats true
  1014. vanitasvitae actually that example made me think that the XEP itself is useless 😀
  1015. vanitasvitae But I can imagine some use case for it server side.
  1016. jonas’ vanitasvitae, neat blog post
  1017. vanitasvitae thanks 😉
  1018. pep. Yeah I also like the blog post otherwise :)
  1019. pep. Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting? If it's not too much a hassle
  1020. vanitasvitae My WP theme doesn't support it unfortunately 🙁
  1021. vanitasvitae Maybe there is a plugin for that..
  1022. pep. k
  1023. jonas’ I bet there is. and I wouldn’t be surprised if it came with a free remote shell!
  1024. vanitasvitae exactly 😛
  1025. Marc has left
  1026. Marc has joined
  1027. marc Ge0rG, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of IBR dataforms somewhere?
  1028. debacle has left
  1029. jonas’ no need to, it contains XEP-0004
  1030. Wojtek has joined
  1031. debacle has joined
  1032. Zash jonas’, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of XEP-0004 somewhere? :P
  1033. jonas’ from a different docmuent, but I think it also applies to IBR: > Sturctured data, beyond lists of text and JIDs, can not be represented with Data Forms (XEP-0004) [9] at all. Machine-readable data would also have to be human-readable at the same time to provide a fallback view for human users. Interationalization of such human-readable data in field values is not possible with Data Forms (XEP-0004) [9].
  1034. jonas’ Zash, as a matter of fact, I did, in a recent ProtoXEP
  1035. Ge0rG marc: yes, but I don't remember where. Might have been on list on the initial 0401 submission
  1036. Jeybe has left
  1037. marc Ge0rG, hm, okay
  1038. pdurbin has left
  1039. Ge0rG My biggest issue was that a client now has to check whether a data form is fully equivalent to plain IBR plus the token
  1040. Ge0rG And then display the regular IBR dialog instead of a full data form dialog
  1041. Ge0rG For which I don't have support anyway
  1042. LNJ has left
  1043. Ge0rG I'm lost now. https://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=site%3Amail.jabber.org+%22XEP-0401%22&oq=site%3Amail.jabber.org+%22XEP-0401%22&aqs=heirloom-srp..
  1044. jonas’ weiird
  1045. jonas’ from searching for "council", I get the impression that google doesn’t have anything newer than 2017 in its indices
  1046. jonas’ ah, 2019-march, too
  1047. vanitasvitae > Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting? Done 😉
  1048. pep. woo :)
  1049. pep. Now it's even more obvious for people to just copy the code!!
  1050. moparisthebest has left
  1051. mukt2 has left
  1052. mukt2 has joined
  1053. Tobias has left
  1054. mukt2 has left
  1055. mukt2 has joined
  1056. Nekit has left
  1057. Jeybe has joined
  1058. pep. Alex, https://github.com/xsf/memberbot/pull/1
  1059. pep. An idea of why memberbot is so slow btw? Or is it my server again being too far?
  1060. jonas’ it introduces an intentional delay I think to make it feel more realistic?
  1061. pep. hah
  1062. pep. It's even setting "composing"
  1063. jonas’ it also sends typing notifications in case you haven’t ... yeah :)
  1064. jonas’ I quite like that actually
  1065. pep. Not too uncanny yet, we're good
  1066. Ge0rG Say what? It's adding latency to feel more human like?
  1067. Ge0rG I haven't tested yet but I hate it already...
  1068. paul has left
  1069. Zash Should fix the thing where messages end up before the responses due to sorting by timestamps with insufficient precision :)
  1070. pep. Real life hacks(tm)
  1071. pep. btw ad-hoc voting is not enabled on memberbot?
  1072. pep. Ah, fulljid.
  1073. Zash woot
  1074. Ge0rG Zash: that should only be an issue if the bot adds timestamp to everything
  1075. pep. returns empty nonetheless..
  1076. pep. But I see code for it
  1077. Ge0rG So it will artificially delay its responses to be more human like, but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes?
  1078. Ge0rG And yes, I hate it indeed
  1079. vanitasvitae > but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes? This is especially annoying if you are on mobile
  1080. pep. Well I just fixed it. Let's awit for Alex to merge it :)
  1081. Ge0rG vanitasvitae: Yes
  1082. vanitasvitae Ge0rG, what?
  1083. Zash Revive https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/buttons.html ?
  1084. pep. Well I just fixed it. Let's wait for Alex to merge it :)
  1085. vanitasvitae You mean yes?
  1086. Ge0rG Speaking of mobile, the wiki is also unreadable
  1087. Zash Yaks, unshaven yaks everywere1
  1088. Zash !
  1089. emus has left
  1090. krauq has left
  1091. krauq has joined
  1092. lorddavidiii has left
  1093. andrey.g has left
  1094. winfried has left
  1095. winfried has joined
  1096. winfried has left
  1097. winfried has joined
  1098. debacle has left
  1099. paul has joined
  1100. Jeybe has left
  1101. arc has joined
  1102. moparisthebest has joined
  1103. neshtaxmpp has left
  1104. neshtaxmpp has joined
  1105. krauq has left
  1106. goffi has left
  1107. waqas has left
  1108. arc has left
  1109. arc has joined
  1110. krauq has joined
  1111. Wojtek has left
  1112. raghavgururajan has joined
  1113. debxwoody has joined