what is the default behavior when a JID choose to quit a MUC
edhelas
looks like most of the clients are not even waiting for the ACK, which can be quite problematic (what if the JID is still connected ?)
lovetoxhas joined
ralphmhas left
jonasw
edhelas, can you clarify?
Flowhas joined
uchas joined
jubalhhas joined
Ge0rG
Another one bites the dust. https://mobile.twitter.com/aim/status/916290747850264577
jonasw
now, all we need is a super-elegant way to get people into the XMPP network
valohas joined
jonasw
off the top of my head: set up an XMPP domain, deploy an AIM transport, let people log in with $aimidentifier@domain.example, import their roster with the @domain.example suffix.
jonasw
I am amazed by the twitter thread though
jonasw
@aim is doing good work there
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
edhelas
jonasw to leave a MUC you send a presence unavailable to the MUC, some clients choose to directly say "you're disconnected from the muc"
jonasw
edhelas, yeah, I mean, what you gonna do anyways?
edhelas
wait for the ACK :)
jonasw
sure, but what if you don’t get the ACK
edhelas
that's what I'm saying
jonasw
yeah, I mean, what’s a client to do about it anyways?
jonasw
it can resend unavailable or start ignoring the messages, because the user clearly doesn’t want to be in the MUC anymore.
jonasw
why would it wait for the ACK for updating the UI if it can handle everything else under the hood without user interaction?
edhelas
what if I send a leave presence, server don't handle it, then I continue to receive messages and presences from the MUC
jonasw
resend an unavailable presence on each presence and message from the MUC until it "gets the message" ;-)
jonasw
just like the TCP stack will send RSTs to each and every unwanted packet.
edhelas
\o/
jonasw
(or maybe send an error presence, that’d be okay too, I think)
jonasw
(or error message, depending on the received thing)
Flowhas left
uchas joined
zinidhas left
ralphmhas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
uchas joined
uchas joined
lumihas joined
pep.has left
pep.has joined
winfriedhas joined
intosihas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas left
ralphmhas left
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
ralphmhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
intosihas left
ralphmhas left
Ge0rG
Yeah, send errors until the MUC finally kicks you out.
jonasw
RST RST RST
jonasw
Ge0rG, errors or presence unavailable?
la|r|mahas joined
Ge0rG
jonasw: errors.
jonasw
mhm
winfriedhas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
pep.has left
pep.has joined
Ge0rG
jonasw: you forgot the Emoji conversion plug-in.
jonasw
context?
Ge0rG
jonasw [12:40]:
> mhm
jonasw
Ge0rG, that’s only in pidgin, and I turned it off again because it caused interoperability issues
Yagizahas left
jubalhhas joined
ralphmhas left
tuxhas joined
tuxhas left
tuxhas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
Yagizahas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
ralphmhas joined
uchas joined
jubalhhas left
xnyhpshas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
la|r|mahas joined
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jubalhhas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas left
la|r|mahas joined
valohas joined
uchas left
mimi89999has joined
vanitasvitaehas left
jerehas joined
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
jerehas left
jerehas joined
tuxhas joined
valohas joined
nycohas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
intosihas joined
tuxhas joined
tuxhas joined
nycohas left
lskdjfhas joined
andrey.ghas left
ralphmhas left
vanitasvitaehas left
intosihas left
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
Yagizahas left
tuxhas joined
mimi89999has joined
Guus
an XMPP domain shouldn't be identifying PEP identities and features, should it (unlike its entity JIDs)?
mimi89999has joined
Guushas left
jubalhhas joined
ralphm
I think an XMPP domain should totally be advertising that it supports PEP
Alexhas joined
ralphm
Or do you think it only makes sense to ask a particular user account?
ralphm
I guess PEP is a special one out, because you'd want to find out before you create an account.
ralphmhas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
Alexhas left
jerehas left
jerehas joined
Guus
that's what https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0163.html#support implies
tim@boese-ban.dehas joined
Guus
also, there's no pep feature, or is there?
Guus
just an identity
Zash
Indeed
Guus
and it feels wrong to me for the server to identify itself as a PEP service
Guus
(I'm talking about the XEP-0030 kind of service discovery, by the way - not advertising stuff on the website :P )