jdev - 2026-07-31

Ah TIL

And you display buttons then for the commands?

Or a drop-down?

> And you display buttons then for the commands? thats what telegram does ↺

https://downloadable.pain.agency/file_share/019fb706-3175-7162-bb5c-ca1eb81ab34e/4f6c974f-91fe-4012-a07d-ede4e2bcf357.png

I think that example would be better with a dropdown

Bots can now also send data forms

A single choice list can be interpreted by a client as a list of buttons for example

> I think that example would be better with a dropdown possibly ↺

i was just saying it is what telegram does

it seems that telegram has some mechanism for the bot dictating what the layout is, and also it tries to make messages interactive and act like the form themselves somehow, but also everythings a chat message and bot commands are / commands but you have a list of them somehow its confusing

telegram is an ...interesting platform

I think adhoc has benefits in multi stage flows, single stage, simply sending a form and client answers with form seems easier?

At least if it's whished that the flow shows in the chat

i mean this is multistage sometimes too, no matter though

i just wish for it to be easier to open an adhoc command list on a user

With adhoc the message is always just a gate to another dialog where I do adhoc, it would be hard to display the interactions in the chat

🤷 tbh i think thats a little up to implementation differences

> i just wish for it to be easier to open an adhoc command list on a user then the message with adhoc commands is the best

> i just wish for it to be easier to open an adhoc command list on a user okay in dms its right where i expected ↺

https://downloadable.pain.agency/file_share/019fb726-81f8-7833-989d-7cd1361c1572/96c68f98-1423-44c6-a895-b3e76d53c053.png

I'm open to implementing that in Gajim

would be nice to having it on a message though, especially if it worked in mucs

As pointed out you can include commands in a message

> As pointed out you can include commands in a message yes ↺

im saying it would be nice to use that

But is it just so the user easier discovers the commands?

Because we could solve that problem also just in the client

In what situation would the bot send this message

ive not read the spec, but im thinking it could be a unique to an interaction. i dont know what that would be used for though

similar to like how bots on discord often use ✅ and ❌ reactions for interactions or something

> ive not read the spec, but im thinking it could be a unique to an interaction. i dont know what that would be used for though unique to the message, like context dependent adhoc command list ↺

again no idea how this would look though

I can imagine stuff like you join a new server and then a bot sends you a message, hey fill out this form

yeah something like that is a good example

though in this case you could just use muc pms and text input would probably be sufficient

> And you display buttons then for the commands? Yeah I do ↺

you'll get a shorter list if you ask which client he isn't developing

> erik wonders which client singpolyma is developing all of them

well, not the one that lovetox is developing, I'd say, because otherwize he'd not be asking the buttons-for-commands question.

cheogram

cheogram android, and snikket, and borogrove (formerly snikket sdk) and like a dozen clients on top of that ?

Does anyone have some code example for implementing XEP-0115 verification string generation? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0115.html#ver

probably could just ask your local LLM to do it for you

Sections 5.2 and 5.3 have worked examples

(assuming you want it for testing)

Yeah that's one thing, but it would also be nice to know if this is actually used in the wild and everyone doesn't just hardcode strings and checks everything but that hash

I’m experiencing weird behavior with a bot… I have multiple clients set up (Fluux on my computer + monal on my computer + monal on my phone) and have set up an “echo” bot where when I receive a message I just reply “got a message: …”, and for some reason the messages seem to only appear on clients I don’t actively have open

like: - I message the bot via fluuux - the reply only comes to monal is this some “obvious” kind of failure mode that I should be aware of? maybe some XEP I have or don’t have active

1. check that Carbons (XEP-0280) is supported and active; 2. check the status priority of each client (ideally they should all be 0)

Oh OK we might have a winner here, the desktop client seems to have a priority of 50 (vs mobile clients with priority 0)… hmm

raphael: sounds like your bot doesn't enable carbons, you can just send the stanza to do so don't need to bother checking anything

priority doesn't matter with carbons

ahhh my bot has to enable carbons as well, gotcha

> Yeah that's one thing, but it would also be nice to know if this is actually used in the wild and everyone doesn't just hardcode strings and checks everything but that hash I have a partial implementation in Deepish: https://gitlab.com/vpzomtrrfrt/deepish/-/blob/b945baa2d7bc93de3744c6e2b2f3404c40495d5f/src/util/connection.ts#L3461 ↺

but yeah in practice I only ever call it with constants

> ahhh my bot has to enable carbons as well, gotcha Not if it's just sending. Which it sounds like it is ↺

https://drop.szsfan.xyz/dbg.log here’s a current log of what’s going on, I’m going to fork this to make this a bit more usable tho/clean this stuff up

lines with "DEBUG: socket sent “ are what I’ve been sending over the wire