XSF Communications Team - 2022-02-14

  1. qwestion has left

  2. qwestion has joined

  3. intosi has left

  4. Toxi has left

  5. adiaholic has joined

  6. neox has left

  7. adiaholic has left

  8. goffi has joined

  9. wh0 has left

  10. wh0 has joined

  11. intosi has joined

  12. intosi has left

  13. goffi has left

  14. la|r|ma has left

  15. adiaholic has joined

  16. Toxi has joined

  17. adiaholic has left

  18. adiaholic has joined

  19. adiaholic has left

  20. intosi has joined

  21. adiaholic has joined

  22. qwestion has left

  23. adiaholic has left

  24. xutaxkamay has joined

  25. debacle has left

  26. intosi has left

  27. emus

    kikuchiyo: can you remove deprecated and obsolete xeps? Link Mauve: wurstsalat can we use his script to render a list like this? or can the PR do such a thing already?

  28. intosi has joined

  29. kikuchiyo has left

  30. malevolent_benedict has joined

  31. kikuchiyo has joined

  32. intosi has left

  33. malevolent_benedict has left

  34. malevolent_benedict has joined

  35. SouL has left

  36. adiaholic has joined

  37. adiaholic has left

  38. singpolyma has left

  39. singpolyma has joined

  40. intosi has joined

  41. adiaholic has joined

  42. malevolent_benedict has left

  43. adiaholic has left

  44. intosi has left

  45. adiaholic has joined

  46. adiaholic has left

  47. adiaholic has joined

  48. intosi has joined

  49. Jérôme has left

  50. intosi has left

  51. adiaholic has left

  52. CybHero has joined

  53. adiaholic has joined

  54. adiaholic has left

  55. adiaholic has joined

  56. adiaholic has left

  57. adiaholic has joined

  58. SouL has joined

  59. intosi has joined

  60. adiaholic has left

  61. intosi has left

  62. Jérôme has joined

  63. wh0 has left

  64. wh0 has joined

  65. Jeybe has joined

  66. me9 has joined

  67. Titi has left

  68. adiaholic has joined

  69. Titi has joined

  70. praveen has joined

  71. intosi has joined

  72. kikuchiyo

    emus: I noticed that xep 0048 is deprecated but a requirement for _advanced group chat_ https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0459.html#nt-idm45924173849280

  73. kikuchiyo

    Also I was wondering why there are widely adopted XEPs which are final/stable that don't show up in 0453.

  74. msavoritias has joined

  75. intosi has left

  76. me9 has left

  77. kikuchiyo

    > kikuchiyo: can you remove deprecated and obsolete xeps? I can provide a file without those lines. My intent to include those was to raise the question whether they should be removed from affected clients, or whether they are backward compatibilities. (That is a question for XSF and client devs.)

  78. wurstsalat has joined

  79. emus has left

  80. Jérôme has left

  81. kikuchiyo

    And what's up with XEP-0114 as a part of _core_ compliance but nobody is using or documenting it?

  82. Jérôme has joined

  83. intosi has joined

  84. praveen has left

  85. intosi has left

  86. intosi has joined

  87. praveen has joined

  88. goffi has joined

  89. adiaholic has left

  90. neox has joined

  91. p42ity has joined

  92. pitchum has left

  93. Alex has joined

  94. Sam has left

  95. adiaholic has joined

  96. msavoritias has left

  97. msavoritias has joined

  98. adiaholic has left

  99. Sam has joined

  100. adiaholic has joined

  101. adiaholic has left

  102. adiaholic has joined

  103. la|r|ma has joined

  104. adiaholic has left

  105. la|r|ma

    0114 is only for servers. client's can't implement it.

  106. la|r|ma

    0114 is only for servers. clients can't implement it.

  107. adiaholic has joined

  108. la|r|ma

    I agree 0048 should probably be removed from an upcoming iteration of compliance suite, we have it there because it remains the most used method for as long as some clients won't implement 0402

  109. la|r|ma

    final/stable doesn't imply that it's always a good idea to implement it. 0258 for example is stable, but it's a niche feature not relevant to most clients and certainly not for the public, federated XMPP network.

  110. kikuchiyo

    la|r|ma: > 0114 is only for servers. clients can't implement it. oh my bad, parsing bug.

  111. kikuchiyo

    la|r|ma: > final/stable doesn't imply that it's always a good idea to implement it. 0258 for example is stable, but it's a niche feature not relevant to most clients and certainly not for the public, federated XMPP network. Yes, but what about those widely supported like 0199, 0203 ...

  112. la|r|ma

    0199 doesn't need to be implemented. It can be useful for connectivity checks to your server, but those can also be done in another way.

  113. la|r|ma

    0203 is kinda implicit via 0313, could be made explicit though.

  114. debacle has joined

  115. Link Mauve

    kikuchiyo, instead of directing DOAP updates to you, it’d be better to direct them to xmpp.org and for you to use it as your source of DOAP files.

  116. Jérôme has left

  117. Link Mauve

    You might want to add the Jingle logo to Jingle, like you added the OMEMO logo for legacy OMEMO support.

  118. kikuchiyo

    Link Mauve: ok, give me a link to include in the next pdf.

  119. kikuchiyo

    Which of the following XEPs are only for servers? 225, 386, 390, 397, 409, 433, 445

  120. Link Mauve

    kikuchiyo, https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/tree/master/data contains a JSON file for each client, server and library.

  121. Link Mauve

    If the doap field is not null, it should point to a valid DOAP file.

  122. Link Mauve

    Note that the Content-Type is often wrong, so you’ll have to ignore it. :(

  123. kikuchiyo

    Link Mauve: thx

  124. Jérôme has joined

  125. Sam

    Link Mauve: there's a Jingle logo? (I was actually looking for something like that the other day and didn't see anything)

  126. wurstsalat

    emus, I'm not sure there is a script involved. kikuchiyo, did you generate this table by hand?

  127. adiaholic has left

  128. Link Mauve


  129. Link Mauve

    Sam, this one.

  130. Sam

    TIL; thanks!

  131. Sam

    I should have known that wikipedia would have it if it existed

  132. COM8 has joined

  133. COM8 has left

  134. adiaholic has joined

  135. COM8 has joined

  136. COM8 has left

  137. COM8 has joined

  138. COM8 has left

  139. emus has joined

  140. emus

    kikuchiyo: did you do table with a script?

  141. emus

    kikuchiyo: ah ok

  142. emus

    Link Mauve: nice

  143. Toxi has left

  144. Toxi has joined

  145. Jérôme has left

  146. SouL has left

  147. SouL has joined

  148. adiaholic has left

  149. adiaholic has joined

  150. goffi has left

  151. goffi has joined

  152. adiaholic has left

  153. emus

    kikuchiyo: https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/1071

  154. emus

    kikuchiyo: https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/issues/1005

  155. adiaholic has joined

  156. pitchum has joined

  157. wh0 has left

  158. wh0 has joined

  159. adiaholic has left

  160. adiaholic has joined

  161. Wojtek has joined

  162. adiaholic has left

  163. adiaholic has joined

  164. adiaholic has left

  165. adiaholic has joined

  166. Jérôme has joined

  167. intosi has left

  168. intosi has joined

  169. goffi has left

  170. eevvoor has joined

  171. intosi has left

  172. intosi has joined

  173. praveen has left

  174. praveen has joined

  175. singpolyma

    kikuchiyo: also note that deferred doesn't mean no one implements or that it's a bad idea, just that it missed procedural deadlines. Sometimes deferred stuff becomes stable once again later after someone champions it

  176. la|r|ma

    Deferred is just another Experimental IMO.

  177. Wojtek has left

  178. la|r|ma

    We need some "Explicitly Deferred" which is not applied by time but by the fact that nobody is interested any more...

  179. Sam

    How would that be different from deferred as it is today? We could presumably explicitly move something to deferred if the author indicated they weren't interested, but whether it happens that way or after a year seems about the same.

  180. singpolyma

    Yeah, and explicitly deferred could still be picked up by someone else later

  181. singpolyma

    Really I don't look at the status at all, only if the protocol described is good and if anyone implements it

  182. Wojtek has joined

  183. singpolyma

    And while there xep charts are useful when doing that research, a client saying "we support xep XXX" can mean wildly different things sometimes, so you always have to actually try it

  184. praveen has left

  185. emus

    singpolyma, la|r|ma: sorry, I think I stupidly raised the to remove it. Question: wouldnt explicitly deferred be obsolete?

  186. Sam

    No, obsolete means "we do not recommend implementing this", deferred means "no one is working on this, but they might start again in the future and it might still be worth having"

  187. emus


  188. singpolyma

    Obsolete is called "historical" and we all implement them anyway because... History

  189. la|r|ma

    Also the reason for deferred could be "this works, but we somehow feel it should be improved before going to stable"

  190. Sam

    Nope, historical is a totally different thing :)

  191. Sam

    la|r|ma: no, that's experimental

  192. Sam

    Obsolete == security issue, deferred == maintainer needed, experimental == being worked on but not ready for stable, historical == documentation of a defacto standard

  193. la|r|ma

    Sam, except if the last change is moer than a year ago

  194. la|r|ma

    which is why I say deferred is sometimes the same as experimental

  195. singpolyma

    Ok, I would definitely not read obsolete as a security issue

  196. Sam

    Sure, that's just the editor forgetting to do things, it's not supposed to happen that way

  197. la|r|ma

    deferred is definitely not maintainer needed

  198. la|r|ma

    it's also sometimes "nobody ever really wanted that XEP"

  199. la|r|ma

    or "we want to get more insights first"

  200. Sam

    That's the most likely reason, but sure, there are other reasons to obsolete something. If I'm generalizing though that's the way to think about it if you're not going to actually go dig in and figure out why.

  201. praveen has joined

  202. Sam

    No, it's neither of those, deferred is just "maintainer needed".

  203. singpolyma

    Possibly maintainer is needed because no one wants the xep and so no maintainer will be found

  204. Sam

    Or rather, it's not necessarily "needed" just "no maintainer" if you want to be pedantic. The point is that deferred XEPs *might* be wanted and maintained again in the future

  205. Sam

    And it's definitely not "we want to get more insights first" unless it's just a mistake and the editor needs to mark it as deferred.

  206. Sam

    At least, not primarily. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

  207. la|r|ma

    There is a number of deferred XEPs where someone designed the spec, everybody agrees it's probably good as is, but nobody implemented it so nobody is really certain. There is no lack of maintainer in those cases.

  208. Sam

    Sure, it can be "we want to get more insight" but then the author leaves so it goes to deferred and it's both.

  209. singpolyma

    Sam: I think the point is that defferred is "expired experimental" so it could mean anything experimental means

  210. la|r|ma

    The XEP author is not always a developer

  211. singpolyma

    Yeah, XEPs getting published with numbers before there are two implementations is an issue

  212. Sam

    Fair enough; maybe I'm wrong, after all these years writing XEPs the XSF process still seems obtuse and confusing to me, so it's quite possible.

  213. la|r|ma

    Maybe check your own XEPs that are deferred and see if they are deferred because you don't want to maintain them or if there is another reason

  214. Sam

    They are deferred because I wasn't maintaining them.

  215. adiaholic has left

  216. adiaholic has joined

  217. singpolyma

    I think we're covering two perspectives here. I think that from a procedural / author / XSF perspective deferred of course means "no maintianer" but that's not the information a XEP reader needs or cares about so they will try to infer a more useful status like "fine but abandoned" vs "needs work" vs "being used in the wild but no one cared to bump the xep"

  218. emus

    Okay guys - Let's move the discussion to xsf@ best I think 🙂

  219. singpolyma

    Sorry :)

  220. emus

    No need to be sorry. Please dont feel disencouraged :)

  221. adiaholic has left

  222. Alex has left

  223. singpolyma has left

  224. Alex has joined

  225. adiaholic has joined

  226. me9 has joined

  227. singpolyma has joined

  228. adiaholic has left

  229. wh0 has left

  230. wh0 has joined

  231. p42ity has left

  232. p42ity has joined

  233. p42ity has left

  234. adiaholic has joined

  235. adiaholic has left

  236. adiaholic has joined

  237. p42ity has joined

  238. p42ity has left

  239. CybHero has left

  240. CybHero has joined

  241. la|r|ma has left

  242. goffi has joined

  243. Wojtek has left

  244. Wojtek has joined

  245. singpolyma has left

  246. singpolyma has joined

  247. kikuchiyo has left

  248. singpolyma has left

  249. singpolyma has joined

  250. Wojtek has left

  251. p42ity has joined

  252. p42ity has left

  253. kikuchiyo has joined

  254. neox has left

  255. neox has joined

  256. singpolyma has left

  257. singpolyma has joined

  258. CybHero has left

  259. p42ity has joined

  260. p42ity has left

  261. praveen has left

  262. Wojtek has joined

  263. wh0 has left

  264. wh0 has joined

  265. la|r|ma has joined

  266. Titi has left

  267. adiaholic has left

  268. adiaholic has joined

  269. abod has joined

  270. adiaholic has left

  271. adiaholic has joined

  272. Wojtek has left

  273. Wojtek has joined

  274. qwestion has joined

  275. praveen has joined

  276. adiaholic has left

  277. adiaholic has joined

  278. Jeybe has left

  279. abod has left

  280. adiaholic has left

  281. adiaholic has joined

  282. debacle has left

  283. adiaholic has left

  284. CybHero has joined

  285. Jérôme has left

  286. adiaholic has joined

  287. adiaholic has left

  288. adiaholic has joined

  289. Titi has joined

  290. adiaholic has left

  291. CybHero has left

  292. CybHero has joined

  293. CybHero has left

  294. CybHero has joined

  295. CybHero has left

  296. CybHero has joined

  297. qwestion has left

  298. adiaholic has joined

  299. CybHero has left

  300. adiaholic has left

  301. adiaholic has joined

  302. abod has joined

  303. adiaholic has left

  304. praveen has left

  305. adiaholic has joined

  306. adiaholic has left

  307. adiaholic has joined

  308. emus

    I invite to collaborate the review of the GSoC applications text within the next 24hrs. PLEASE use the comment function ONLY and do not edit directly: https://yopad.eu/p/xsf_gsoc2022 See top bar.

  309. abod has left

  310. debacle has joined

  311. Wojtek has left

  312. Wojtek has joined

  313. Jeybe has joined

  314. p42ity has joined

  315. adiaholic has left

  316. adiaholic has joined

  317. Wojtek has left

  318. p42ity has left

  319. adiaholic has left

  320. adiaholic has joined

  321. Jérôme has joined

  322. adiaholic has left

  323. Toxi has left

  324. adiaholic has joined

  325. TheCoffeMaker

    emus: I have to send the PR with the ES translation ... Didnt have time to finish it yet 🥺

  326. adiaholic has left

  327. emus has left

  328. jcbrand has left

  329. adiaholic has joined

  330. emus has joined

  331. emus

    no worries, take your time

  332. adiaholic has left

  333. Jeybe has left

  334. goffi has left

  335. adiaholic has joined

  336. adiaholic has left

  337. Jérôme has left

  338. emus has left

  339. msavoritias has left

  340. adiaholic has joined

  341. adiaholic has left

  342. wurstsalat has left

  343. Titi has left

  344. debacle has left

  345. Alex has left

  346. me9 has left

  347. adiaholic has joined

  348. adiaholic has left

  349. adiaholic has joined