XSF Discussion - 2014-01-27


  1. Kev

    I don't think we captured start times on http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Summit_15#Agenda

  2. Kev

    ISTR discussing it in here (I vaguely remember talk of 9:30 for a 10am start Thursday, and 9:30ish Friday. Does anyone want to take ownership of that?

  3. ralphm

    I said 10

  4. Kev

    As an executive decision, or suggestion?

  5. Kev

    If the former, fancy updating the wiki? :)

  6. dwd

    If the latter, let's pick 0930 for 1000 as a decision and goto 10.

  7. dwd decides arbitrarily to go for a BASIC idiom.

  8. ralphm

    Kev: suggestion. Feel free to set the time in the wiki, Mr. Chairman.

  9. Simon

    BASIC. Unsupported command. Try logo.

  10. dwd

    I have to admit I've largely forgotten Logo.

  11. Kev

    LEFT 180

  12. Simon

    FD 30, RT90

  13. dwd

    I remember what one did with it.

  14. dwd

    I just forget the syntax.

  15. ralphm

    I had a German-language module without a manual.

  16. Simon

    http://www.calormen.com/jslogo/

  17. ralphm

    Had to dive into hexdumps to discover command names

  18. ralphm

    Maybe I wasn't the target audience.

  19. dwd

    So both LEFT and LT turn out to be legal. But Simon's comma is in error - no statement seperators.

  20. Kev

    So, we have a general decision to start at 10 both days? (Aiming for folks to get there for 9:30 to settle down?)

  21. intosi

    REPEAT 36 [ FD 10 LT 10 ]

  22. Simon

    Sounds comfortable. 5 of us flying from Munich will be there at about 9am or so.

  23. Kev

    Do we know that this is OK with Cisco for us turning up?

  24. Kev

    What did folks arrange there?

  25. Simon

    we'll camp at the airport and have breakfast or sumfing

  26. Kev

    I meant that a 9:30 start, rather than you particularly.

  27. dwd

    BTW, we've a new top dinner sponsor.

  28. Kev

    What nice folks.

  29. dwd

    And another sponsor confirmed! (Thanks ChatID!)

  30. Simon

    the MUC runners?

  31. Simon

    nice - thanks guys.

  32. MattJ

    Simon, actually ChatID is in the process of switching over to MUC internally :)

  33. Simon

    Isn't that like IRC?

  34. MattJ

    Except with presence, strong identity, extensibility and... standards? :)

  35. Simon

    10/10! (Just checking we have our marketing lines all practiced ready for FOSDEM.)

  36. fippo

    *giggle*

  37. fippo

    can i rant about nickchanges in MUC?

  38. waqas

    Go on

  39. waqas

    fippo: Was it going to be about 2 presences vs 1? :)

  40. Simon

    fippo: please tell us a storey about Psyc.

  41. Simon

    shouldn't MUC be multicast?

  42. fippo

    haha @simon. ok, MUC sucks completly :-)

  43. fippo

    simon: MUC is like IRC but lacks multicast!

  44. fippo

    waqas: it breaks jingle sessions for example.

  45. waqas

    fippo: Ha, yes

  46. waqas

    So a clients maintaining a fixed unique id for occupants works around this?

  47. Simon

    I'm more curious about your name on http://about.psyc.eu/XMPP :)

  48. waqas

    Oh, and +1 to Psyc stories

  49. fippo

    simon: see document history ;-)

  50. Simon

    Thursday evening. Drinks at XYZ bar and fippo explaining what the following means

  51. Simon

    Philipp Hancke (as author of 99% of psyceds net/jabber module): note that the following text is heavily biased, may contain inaccuracies and generally tries to persuade you that [[PSYC]] is so much better than XMPP.

  52. Simon

    fippo also popping up in random Austrian huts: https://plus.google.com/photos/+SimonTennant/albums/5973593611259914241/5973593611994742770?pid=5973593611994742770&oid=101190913792731232738

  53. ralphm

    fippo: I could see something /like/ user nicknames in MUC. In fact, I think it would not be odd to see if we can improve upon MUC in several areas while maintaining backwards compatibility.

  54. dwd also hates nickname changing in MUC.

  55. dwd

    Means your server ends up keeping lots of directed presence markers around which are bogus.

  56. Kev

    I like Swift's approach to nickname changing.

  57. Kev

    If you can't make up your mind, leave the MUC and rejoin it with the right nick.

  58. Simon likes Swift's approach

  59. waqas

    I haven't seen Swift's approach yet

  60. Kev

    waqas: I just described it. No nick changing :)

  61. fippo

    ralphm: s/nickname/display name/

  62. waqas

    Ha

  63. fippo

    kev: i like it too. maybe you can explain emcho how cool it is :-)

  64. ralphm

    "swift's approach" is what Google Talk expected, and caused presence fails

  65. ralphm

    In any case, I think that room nicks / display names should be orthogonal to presence

  66. dwd

    ralphm, I agree, but that'd be a departure from the existing spec.

  67. Zash

    MUC2!

  68. dwd

    ralphm, FWIW, if we did split nicks and presence, then multiple occupancy becomes trivial.

  69. fippo

    and we can add multicast! :-p

  70. MattJ

    Uh-oh

  71. fippo

    mattj: we just have to agree on a definition of what that means before ;-)

  72. Zash

    MUC based on xep-33?

  73. waqas

    MUC based on pubsub, after we've made it turing complete. That way MUC doesn't need to be a separate piece of code, just something which runs on top of pubsub.

  74. MattJ

    waqas, "after we've made it turing complete" - just ask ralphm about node as code :)

  75. Zash

    Eeuuuh?

  76. waqas

    We haven't standardized a language for node as code yet. You can't make a portable pubsub implementation without that.

  77. waqas

    XSLT with some storage feature built in? ^^

  78. ralphm

    waqas: I'm not particularly inclined to redo on top of PubSub

  79. ralphm

    dwd: I think you can do a new join protocol, triggering an alternate mode. You can also do display name changes based on IQs, and block nick changes for legacy clients, like section 7.6

  80. waqas

    ralphm: You aren't seeing the full picture. Once it's turning complete, we can write an equivalent of emscripten for it. Just think: TCP over pubsub, Linux over pubsub. Portable across all conforming XMPP servers. The microblogging folks can finally implement the whole thing by running statusnet over pubsub.

  81. waqas

    All XMPP problems will be solved forever

  82. ralphm

    waqas: what's your favorite food?

  83. waqas

    Depends. Ice cream is generally good all the time though.

  84. ralphm

    haha

  85. bear shakes fist at Isode and their amazingly great sponsor amount

  86. dwd

    bear, You'll also note that ChatID's amazingly great amount is one less than &Yet's, at least in binary...

  87. waqas

    dwd: I was asking MattJ if someone paying 110+101+100+11+10+1 would get 6 mentions

  88. dwd

    It is quite tempting to fill those, instead of actually looking for the amount we *need*...

  89. ralphm

    that said, donating more than once is possible

  90. bear

    yes, I did chuckle at the 111 amount

  91. bear

    I think I will donate at the 101 amount

  92. dwd

    Yeah, it's tempting to fill that end in that way.

  93. dwd

    Anyone in for a Euro?

  94. fippo

    dwd: here!

  95. fippo

    unless you turn down requests from persons

  96. MattJ

    Individuals have sponsored before iirc

  97. MattJ

    Put me down for €10 if you like :)

  98. dwd

    Yes, I've been pushing back individuals, though.

  99. MattJ

    Peoples' OCD might kick in to fill the gaps in the series

  100. dwd

    bear, You serious about the 101?

  101. bear

    yes

  102. dwd

    I could use a €100, really.

  103. bear

    101 or 100 - whichever is needed

  104. dwd

    But the new sponsors are listed...

  105. dwd

    Isode : €1001 &Yet : €1000 ChatID : €111 Dave 'dwd' Cridland : €110 Mike 'Bear' Taylor : €101 Matthew Wild : €10 Philipp 'Fippo' Hancke : €1

  106. fippo

    11 is still open

  107. dwd

    Oh, good point.

  108. waqas

    I can do the 11...

  109. dwd

    waqas, You're not even coming.

  110. waqas

    I can also do the 1 spot :)

  111. waqas

    I'll join over hangout/webrtc room if we have one :)

  112. MattJ

    For the dinner?

  113. fippo

    waqas: i plan to bring equipment and setup something on the jitsi bridge with proper xmpp :-)

  114. waqas

    Nice :)

  115. Simon

    fippo - could you also do a demo of the Psyc XMPP bridge?

  116. fippo

    simon: the one i'm using right now?

  117. Simon needs moar multicast.

  118. MattJ

    Simon, do you have any idea what you're saying? :)

  119. Simon

    MattJ: I've read the wiki history.

  120. Simon

    and I've stuck in the snow in the mountains and need amusement.

  121. fippo

    simon: of course I can re-add the smart presence thing and show you how xmpp could have been alot more efficient a decade ago

  122. fippo

    well, almost :-p

  123. dwd

    fippo, PEP.

  124. dwd

    Thanks, winfried!

  125. bear

    that makes my OCD so happy

  126. bear

    one spot left *hint* *hint*

  127. winfried

    One?

  128. winfried

    what about 1010

  129. winfried

    1011

  130. winfried

    1100

  131. winfried

    ???

  132. dwd

    Question is whether I could allow a non-binary one...

  133. Simon

    or other numbers…

  134. waqas

    Well, we can allow conversion to decimal...

  135. fippo

    10000 ... ;-)

  136. waqas

    10000 = 16 in base 10...

  137. dwd

    I should stress the amounts *are* decimal...

  138. dwd

    Or else we get no dinner.

  139. bear

    oh, I think we all will put on the appropriate "filter" if anyone wants to donate any amount

  140. fippo

    i.e. making it a table with the appropriate base? ;-)

  141. ralphm

    sure, "any amount" is acceptable

  142. Tobias

    emcho, so...to FOSDEM will Jitsi be able to call into jitsi video bridge and call to webrtc clients?

  143. fippo

    tobias: not that I know of :-/

  144. Tobias

    :/

  145. Tobias

    what's missing, it's standard Jingle, no?

  146. fippo

    no... media level interop weirdness between chrome vp8 and jitsi vp8.

  147. emcho

    Tobias: we have a prototype working but I am not sure if we'll be demoing that on FOSDEM

  148. Tobias

    ahh...ok

  149. Tobias

    fippo, interop? is there more than one vp8 implementation?

  150. emcho

    Tobias: not really ... and it's not really only a matter of protocol

  151. emcho

    Tobias: not really ... and it's not only a matter of protocol

  152. fippo

    tobias: chrome does some... interesting things at rtp level

  153. Tobias

    emcho, was that using Last Message Correction?

  154. emcho

    nah ... some other bug

  155. Tobias

    fippo, ahh..ok. RTP level strangeness

  156. Tobias

    emcho, ahh..ok

  157. emcho

    the biggest hurdle is VP8

  158. emcho

    (which also comes with RED and FEC

  159. emcho

    that's what we are currently implementing

  160. emcho

    we already had VP8 but it wasn't complete and didn't work with chrome

  161. emcho

    we do have a prototype now ... but not sure if it makes sense demoing

  162. emcho

    not that stable

  163. Tobias

    ah..ok

  164. Tobias

    i find it very interesting....slowly approaching a skype replacement that has more than feature equivalence

  165. dwd

    Tobias, We're getting very close to parity from Skype's perspective - one-on-one and small conf-calls - but we're also able to cover other ground too.

  166. dwd

    Tobias, I'm personally hoping we can tackle the GotoMeeting/Webex/etc kind of capability, too, within the year.

  167. Tobias

    dwd, yup...especially with conferences in rooms with light control...kind of a pumped up skype conference similar to mumble but with better usability

  168. fippo

    dwd: we've had ~13 persons using th bridge last friday

  169. dwd

    fippo, Yeah, I think the bridge is a big part of this.

  170. fippo

    and the experience was very unlike https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYu_bGbZiiQ

  171. dwd

    Conf call IRL thing?

  172. fippo

    yeah.

  173. Tobias

    fippo, :)

  174. dwd

    Lance, I like your push stuff.

  175. Lance

    thanks

  176. dwd

    Lance, And not entirely because you've managed to make "XEP-0198 Zombie" a term of art.

  177. Kev

    Not entirely. But almost.