xmppnoob, you may also be interested in starting from an existing client, rather than writing everything from scratch.
Link Mauve
Also on mobile.
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
SouLhas left
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
goffihas joined
debaclehas joined
ajhas joined
larmahas left
strarhas left
larmahas joined
strarhas joined
asterixhas left
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
strarhas left
strarhas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
SouLhas joined
lovetoxhas joined
ajhas left
debaclehas left
pulkomandyhas left
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
sonnyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
pulkomandyhas left
paulhas left
paulhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas joined
pulkomandyhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
Neustradamushas joined
asterixhas joined
SouLhas left
SouLhas joined
SouLhas left
SouLhas joined
sonnyhas joined
rionhas left
rionhas joined
sonnyhas left
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
rion
Which sides sends ibb open for a jingle transport? A session initiator or a transport creator? They are not always the same
rion
It can be also content creator. So one of three
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
rion
Seems like it's always session initiator according to the diagram in the xep. So doesn't matter which side added the content or replaced the transport. Is it so?
lovetoxhas left
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
lovetoxhas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
sonnyhas joined
serge90has left
serge90has joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
kikuchiyohas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
sonnyhas left
ajhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
ajhas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
kikuchiyohas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
debaclehas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
sonnyhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
sonnyhas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
strarhas left
strarhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
strarhas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
strarhas joined
strarhas left
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
strarhas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
pulkomandyhas left
kikuchiyohas left
kikuchiyohas joined
bhaveshsguptahas left
bhaveshsguptahas joined
pulkomandyhas joined
flow
lovetox, I just invited someone to a members only room via gajim. It would be great if gajim would asked if I want to make the bare jid a member prior inviting. Do you want me to create a feature request (if there is none already)?
pulkomandyhas left
lovetox
does that question make sense?
lovetox
there is no choice there
jonas’
I think it should simply always do that if it can, and use mediated + warning if it can’t
flow
well I could be unware that it's a members only room, but fair point
lovetox
of course the whole topic is a bit of a mess
lovetox
and one of the topics in xmpp that you cant do right in all circumstances
sonnyhas joined
pulkomandyhas joined
lovetox
this definitly deserves a wiki entry
lovetox
i will soon touch that code in Gajim then i will look into it
lovetox
first question to me would be if servers show muc#roomconfig_allowinvites in disco info
lovetox
or if i need to pull the config, which is impossible as non admin
lovetox
if servers dont expose that, i would simple disallow any non admin to invite people into a member-only room
lovetox
and as an admin, i would use a mediated invite, and hope the server implements adding the invitee automatically
MattJ
I think prosody exposes that in disco
lovetox
really the whole room config should be exposed, i see no sense in hiding it