jdev - 2024-02-21


  1. badlop

    edhelas, goffi: during the XMPP Summit, you mentioned that it would be great if ejabberd had nightly builds, right?

  2. goffi

    badlop: not me.

  3. edhelas

    I did ?

  4. edhelas

    Not sure, but yes it might be a good idea :D

  5. badlop

    in any case, there are binary installers and container images; it is now mentioned in https://github.com/processone/ejabberd?tab=readme-ov-file#development

  6. lovetox

    when using occupant id in a MUC, the client is now able to detect nick changes

  7. lovetox

    when a user changes his nick, would you expect the client to change the nick on all historic messages?

  8. lovetox

    i would tend to yes, at least i would expect it for single chat, so why not for MUC

  9. meson

    In case of a MUC would you also replace the mentioned nick in messages too?

  10. lovetox

    that was my question

  11. lovetox

    > would you expect the client to change the nick on all historic messages?

  12. Wirlaburla

    I would say no and meson makes a good point as to why. Messages should be left as-is. The association to those messages should be known though.

  13. meson

    What if someone called Alice changes their nick to Bob, while someone talks about a different Alice? Would all Alices become Bobs? :P

  14. lovetox

    ah you mean if someone mentions someone

  15. meson

    If you add the occupant ID to the mentioned user, then it could work

  16. Wirlaburla

    What if John changes his name to Bob and Steve changes his name to John? Previous messages would be confusing.

  17. lovetox

    hm yeah, the difference to single chat seems that in groupchats many people talk about each other and mention each other

  18. Wirlaburla

    In single chats, you atleast always know who you are talking to.

  19. lovetox

    while in single chat you usually dont mention the other side

  20. lovetox

    but avatar is a different story i guess

  21. lovetox

    i would change that also for historic messages

  22. dan.caseley

    As a defence, an implementation could reserve previously used nicks for some period of time.

  23. Wirlaburla

    I think history should be left as-is. It's how you received it, it is who you got it from.

  24. Wirlaburla

    You don't go through your letters and start erasing a persons name on the envelope because they changed their name.

  25. Wirlaburla

    Of course in that case, a nick change should also be informed and preserved just as much.

  26. dan.caseley

    Another analogy though: If that person changed their name, you'd update it in your contacts and your apps that rely on it, like SMS, would all show the new name against old messages.

  27. dan.caseley

    (I don't actually have strong feelings on this, but exploring it from the perspective of a user's expectations is interesting)

  28. Wirlaburla

    Yes, but it is their actual identity being changed then, not their nick associated within a group.

  29. Wirlaburla

    It is a perplexing issue though. I'm usually concrete on things but this one has my mind gears turning.

  30. lovetox

    the problem with mentioning is real tough, because we dont have a widley deployed mentioning mechanism that references some unique occupant id

  31. lovetox

    so im not able to change that, which would then be weird

  32. meson

    Other messengers require to start with an @ in front of the nick to both mention someone and link it to an occupant id, I guess? Hello @alice!

  33. singpolyma

    We've always been able to detect nick changes, it's just easier and more reliable now 😉 I think the right answer for which nick to show will vary. For exmaple in non anon MUCs conversations sometimes shows the roster name which might match none of the occupant nicks!

  34. hello!

    Hello. I'm having trouble setting Tor Onion Prosody. I can't connect in the XMPP client to the onion, but can connect to other servers onions. Do I need a 2nd copy of the onion keys in the prosody folder? or can it find them from the onion website on the same server?