XSF Discussion - 2018-01-05

  1. lovetox has left

  2. dwd has left

  3. la|r|ma has joined

  4. ralphm has joined

  5. mimi89999 has joined

  6. SamWhited has joined

  7. la|r|ma has joined

  8. lskdjf has joined

  9. jere has left

  10. jere has joined

  11. SamWhited has left

  12. lskdjf has joined

  13. lskdjf has joined

  14. moparisthebest has left

  15. Syndace has left

  16. Syndace has joined

  17. Tobias has joined

  18. moparisthebest has joined

  19. Tobias has joined

  20. vanitasvitae has left

  21. hannes has left

  22. hannes has joined

  23. SouL has joined

  24. SouL has left

  25. jere has left

  26. jere has joined

  27. jere has left

  28. jere has joined

  29. mimi89999 has joined

  30. SamWhited has left

  31. Zash has left

  32. Zash has left

  33. Zash has joined

  34. tux has left

  35. tux has joined

  36. moparisthebest has left

  37. moparisthebest has left

  38. dwd has left

  39. efrit has joined

  40. moparisthebest has left

  41. uc has joined

  42. efrit has left

  43. efrit has joined

  44. efrit has left

  45. efrit has joined

  46. efrit has left

  47. jere has left

  48. jere has joined

  49. ralphm has left

  50. ralphm has joined

  51. jere has left

  52. jere has joined

  53. Guus has left

  54. tim@boese-ban.de has joined

  55. Guus has left

  56. mimi89999 has joined

  57. dwd has joined

  58. dwd has joined

  59. daniel has left

  60. daniel has joined

  61. daniel has left

  62. daniel has joined

  63. jere has joined

  64. ralphm has left

  65. moparisthebest has joined

  66. zinid has joined

  67. suzyo has joined

  68. daniel has left

  69. daniel has joined

  70. marc has left

  71. ralphm has left

  72. marc has joined

  73. Guus has left

  74. Flow

    jonasw, i've just discussed with ge0rg that entity caps would need a push mechanism for the service's ver attribute because the server may enable a feature dynamically at runtime. I'm not sure if this is something for xep390

  75. suzyo has joined

  76. Ge0rG

    there is the implicit assumption that stream features / server caps don't change over the lifetime of a connection.

  77. Ge0rG

    I suppose the server could send a presence unavailable from the service domain, containing the caps hash.

  78. Flow

    hmm, my first though was to use a message for the push

  79. hannes has joined

  80. Ge0rG

    Flow: entity caps is using presence everywhere. If you have a presence listener anyway, it would just get reused

  81. Flow

    good point, but i'm not sure if this justifies

  82. Flow

    reusing presence

  83. Ge0rG

    We could just invent a new nonza.

  84. Zash


  85. Flow

    that only causes trouble when using stream resumption

  86. Flow

    or maybe not since the features are announced early

  87. Ge0rG


  88. Zash

    Features are still things attached to potentially remote entities, right?

  89. Zash

    So you want notifications to be routable stanzas.

  90. Flow

    Zash, so you also think that the service should use an unavailable presence as xep115/390 push?

  91. Zash

    Flow: Huh?

  92. pep.

    Could this be used for stuff like pubsub services?

  93. Guus has left

  94. Flow

    pep, not really, a remote service doesn't know that you are using it, so we would need a way to register for caps updates

  95. pep.

    I know edhelas was interested in having sth similar to caps for that

  96. Flow

    which seems a little but to much for a problem that hasn't been a problem since xep115 exists

  97. Ge0rG

    just send out presence pushes to all entities that ever asked for your caps :P

  98. Flow

    Ge0rG, for all eternity?

  99. pep.

    As querying a service with thousands if nodes can be quite heavy

  100. Zash

    Flow: I'm probably missing tons of context here

  101. Ge0rG

    while we are at it, there is no caching for disco#items.

  102. Flow

    Zash, I don't think so, it's really just "what if your service gets a new feature at runtime"

  103. Ge0rG

    Zash: context is: a client wants to cache its server's entity caps, but those can change when modules get (un)loaded

  104. Flow

    (which isn't really a practical problem)

  105. Flow

    Ge0rG, like client's caching disco#items?

  106. Zash


  107. ralphm has left

  108. Ge0rG

    Flow: there are rather static and more dynamic disco#items...

  109. Ge0rG

    The typical flow is: 1) query domain for disco#items 2) iterate over each item's disco#info

  110. Flow

    Ge0rG, true

  111. Ge0rG

    maybe adding the caps into disco#items would already prove sufficient, as we can't skip 1 anyway

  112. suzyo has joined

  113. ralphm has joined

  114. Flow

    Ge0rG, that doesn't sound like a bad idea

  115. Ge0rG

    I'm full of good ideas. Implementation is what matters :P

  116. Flow

    only problem is that xep30 has a "<item/> SHOULD be empty"

  117. Ge0rG

    just add a new attribute to item :P

  118. Flow

    but the schema!

  119. Ge0rG

    unknown attributes must be ignored?

  120. Flow

    says who?

  121. Flow

    (not saying that isn't what I'm doing)

  122. Ge0rG

    general consensus

  123. marc

    Ge0rG, I'm pondering if we should skip account creation on this XEP for simplicity and make an own XEP (with a reference to this one) later. What do you think?

  124. pep.

    Depends on how strict you want your parser. I know often it helps fond bugs when you are

  125. pep.


  126. Ge0rG

    marc: that's what I was telling you in the beginning :P

  127. marc

    Ge0rG, no, you had the idea to combine PARS and my account creation becaus they are similar :p

  128. remko has joined

  129. Ge0rG

    marc: if we skip account creation out, we can just rewrite PARS to be a server-side adhoc command triggered thing, and add the `ibr` flag to the spec for servers supporting that.

  130. Ge0rG

    marc: but honestly, I've seen multiple situations in the past where the account creation flow would make sense.

  131. marc

    Ge0rG, :D

  132. marc

    Okay, let's keep it then?

  133. Ge0rG

    marc: I wouldn't even mind putting both use cases into PARS.

  134. marc

    hm, doesn't fit the name PARS IMO

  135. marc

    at least account creation

  136. remko has left

  137. Ge0rG

    marc: good point.

  138. Ge0rG

    marc: I suppose renaming PARS into "Easy Onboarding" would be counter-productive. Some nerds already know what "PARS" stands for.

  139. Ge0rG

    jonasw: being the editor, is there prior case law, or do you consider it a good idea to rename an XEP when its scope shifts?

  140. Kev

    I'd expect Council to be involved in the shifting of scope, at least.

  141. Kev

    One can't really get Council to accept an Experimental XEP for one purpose, and then change the purpose of the XEP.

  142. daniel has joined

  143. Ge0rG

    Kev: okay, so we have PARS. And we want to extend it to carry a flag that the token may also be used for IBR. And then we further want to extend it to allow "account sharing" where an admin sends a link to friends to easily onboard them.

  144. Ge0rG

    They are using the same wire format

  145. Ge0rG

    And are all belonging to "Easy Onboarding"

  146. Kev

    That doesn't seem to be particularly changing the scope much.

  147. Ge0rG

    Kev: it's not "Pre-Authenticated Roster Subscription" any more, but rather "Pre-Authenticated User Onboarding"

  148. Kev


  149. Ge0rG

    so it's not changing the purpose, but still shifting the focus

  150. Kev

    This isn't particularly ringing alarm bells for me.

  151. pep.

    PARS -> PAUO, hmm

  152. pep.

    I preferred the first name Ge0rG :p

  153. Ge0rG

    pep.: me too. Will need to come up with a new catchy backronym first.

  154. Martin has joined

  155. pep.

    And the discussion about caps ended

  156. goffi has joined

  157. Ge0rG

    marc: so have you written down anything yesterday?

  158. daniel has left

  159. marc

    Ge0rG, no, not anything. What's the plan now? New XEP, re-using PARS XEP?

  160. Ge0rG

    marc: I'm ambivalent about leaving account-creation in or out.

  161. Ge0rG

    marc: maybe a new "Easy Onboarding" XEP is better suited.

  162. Ge0rG

    or maybe... dunno

  163. Ge0rG lacks coffee

  164. marc

    Ge0rG, a new XEP for user invitation and account creation as is?

  165. lskdjf has joined

  166. ralphm has joined

  167. Martin has left

  168. Martin has joined

  169. la|r|ma has joined

  170. Ge0rG

    marc: there are three user stories I see as relevant: 1) explicit account sharing --> uses PARS-style URI with token and custom IBR payload <xmpp://invitee@domain?register;preauth=XXX> 2) roster invitation with IBR to somebody without an account --> uses the IBR wire format from #1, server auto-enrosters user 3) roster invitation with IBR to somebody with existing account --> uses PARS as is

  171. Ge0rG

    #2 and #3 share the <xmpp:inviter@domain?add;preauth=XXX;ibr> URI

  172. Ge0rG

    we could make three XEPs: PARS, a new XEP for account-sharing + the new IBR payload, a new "Easy Onboarding" XEP bringing them all together

  173. Guus has left

  174. Ge0rG

    or just two XEPs: PARS and a new one for everything else.

  175. Ge0rG

    or stick everything into PARS, because there is so much overlap between #1 and #2 and between #2 and #3

  176. Alex has joined

  177. marc

    Ge0rG, I agree but I don't know what's the best solution regarding XEP(s) for it

  178. daniel has left

  179. daniel has joined

  180. waqas has left

  181. lumi has joined

  182. daniel has left

  183. daniel has joined

  184. ralphm has left

  185. daniel has left

  186. suzyo has joined

  187. daniel has joined

  188. goffi has left

  189. Ge0rG

    From a symmetry perspective, #1 and PARS are similar to each other as they are building blocks that can be combined in #2

  190. Ge0rG

    so it wouldn't make much sense to have PARS separate, but not IBR+

  191. zinid has left

  192. Kev has left

  193. suzyo has joined

  194. marc

    Ge0rG: So, a new XEP for account creation and user invitation as already planned?

  195. Ge0rG

    marc: no

  196. la|r|ma has left

  197. Alex has left

  198. vanitasvitae has left

  199. Steve Kille has left

  200. daniel has left

  201. Steve Kille has left

  202. Steve Kille has left

  203. Steve Kille has left

  204. Steve Kille has left

  205. Ge0rG has joined

  206. suzyo has left

  207. lskdjf has joined

  208. daniel has left

  209. daniel has joined

  210. goffi has joined

  211. suzyo has joined

  212. zinid has left

  213. valo has joined

  214. winfried has joined

  215. winfried has joined

  216. @Alacer has left

  217. @Alacer has joined

  218. Alex has joined

  219. SouL has left

  220. la|r|ma has joined

  221. la|r|ma has joined

  222. daniel has left

  223. daniel has joined

  224. Ge0rG

    marc: after some more pondering I'd say we need exactly one new XEP.

  225. Steve Kille has left

  226. moparisthebest has joined

  227. Steve Kille has joined

  228. daniel has left

  229. daniel has joined

  230. hannes has left

  231. hannes has joined

  232. Steve Kille has left

  233. daniel has left

  234. daniel has joined

  235. jere has joined

  236. hannes has left

  237. tim@boese-ban.de has left

  238. hannes has joined

  239. daniel has left

  240. daniel has joined

  241. Holger has left

  242. lumi has joined

  243. ralphm has joined

  244. daniel has left

  245. daniel has joined

  246. marc

    Ge0rG, and what's the content of this new XEP?

  247. ralphm has joined

  248. Ge0rG

    marc: a description of the two use cases and how a receiving client should handle them, the wire protocol for IBR+token and a reference to PARS

  249. marc

    Ge0rG, two use cases = account creation & user invitation?

  250. Ge0rG

    marc: right

  251. Ge0rG

    marc: there is really no need to distinguish between #2 and #3 from yesterday's discussion

  252. jere has left

  253. jere has joined

  254. jere has left

  255. marc

    Ge0rG, -> no "ibr" parameter?

  256. Ge0rG

    marc: account creation --> `xmpp://newuser@domain?register;preauth=XXX` user invitation --> `xmpp:inviter@domain?roster;preauth=XXX;ibr`

  257. marc

    Ge0rG, wtf, we discussed 2h regarding the action parameter and you didn't like it and now you have "?roster"? :D

  258. jjrh has left

  259. Ge0rG

    marc: account creation --> `xmpp://newuser@domain?register;preauth=XXX` user invitation --> `xmpp:inviter@domain?;preauth=XXX;ibr`

  260. la|r|ma has left

  261. marc


  262. marc

    And no "?;" please :)

  263. Ge0rG

    marc: for some reason I used ?roster in one place in 0379, but not in the other places.

  264. Ge0rG

    ?; = empty action, not to be confused with: ?: = elvis operator

  265. marc

    "?;" doesn't make sense IMO, we discussed it already ;)

  266. marc

    Ge0rG, well, for PARS-only the "?roster" action makes sense, doesn't it?

  267. marc

    Not not in combination with "ibr", I thought that's what came out last time we discussed the action parameter stuff

  268. marc


  269. Ge0rG

    marc: generally speaking, the ?roster action doesn't make any sense, ever.

  270. marc

    Ge0rG, okay, you should update your XEP then

  271. Ge0rG

    marc: we should update 0147

  272. Ge0rG

    except nobody cared about it two years ago.

  273. marc

    Ge0rG, I would mention server-side PARS in the new XEP and make a reference to the PARS XEP, okay?

  274. marc

    For server-side PARS the server returns the normal PARS URI

  275. Ge0rG

    marc: for server-side PARS, the server returns either a normal PARS URI or one with `ibr` flag.

  276. Ge0rG

    I don't know if the ibr flag needs to have a value, though.

  277. Ge0rG

    URI parsing is a art.

  278. marc

    Not really :)

  279. marc

    Ge0rG, a value?

  280. marc

    Like "ibr=" ?

  281. Ge0rG

    marc: like `ibr=1`

  282. Ge0rG

    because an empty value is not much more than no value at all

  283. marc


  284. marc

    Empty values are fine

  285. marc

    See action parameters :D

  286. Ge0rG

    marc: no, there is actually a problem here. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5122#section-2.2 Only allows the query type (i.e. action) to be valueless

  287. Ge0rG

    query parameters need to have an "=" between key and value, albeit the value might be empty

  288. Ge0rG

    furhermore, xmpp://domain/ is invalid

  289. marc

    Okay, that's all XMPP URI related :-/

  290. marc

    But that means we need an action type

  291. marc

    At least one "iquerytype"

  292. marc

    Well, exactly one "iquerytype"

  293. Ge0rG

    marc: iquerytype may be empty, leading us back to ?;

  294. marc

    This URI definition is really shitty...

  295. Ge0rG

    marc: it never was designed for what we are doing with it now.

  296. Ge0rG

    We could have `xmpp:inviter@domain?preauth=XXX;ibr=YYY` but I don't want to add a second token for the sake of adding a second token.

  297. Ge0rG

    especially as other applications will want to append crpyto keys and then render everything as a QR code

  298. marc

    You forgot "?;"

  299. marc

    Ugly as hell...

  300. daniel has joined

  301. goffi has left

  302. Ge0rG

    marc: yeah, ?preauth is a violation already.

  303. marc

    Ge0rG, fix your XEP then :D

  304. Ge0rG

    marc: to what? `?;`?

  305. marc

    Yes :>

  306. Ge0rG

    Can do, I suppose. Let's hope my parser won't crash on that

  307. marc

    Or we change the RFC :D

  308. Ge0rG


  309. Ge0rG


  310. lumi has joined

  311. Ge0rG has left

  312. la|r|ma has joined

  313. daniel has left

  314. daniel has joined

  315. jjrh has left

  316. goffi has joined

  317. Ge0rG

    > This document extends the "roster" URI action defined in XEP-0147 with a new key-value parameter named "preauth" to store the generated token. So maybe it's action=roster after all?

  318. Alex has left

  319. jjrh has left

  320. intosi has joined

  321. moparisthebest has left

  322. Guus has joined

  323. daniel has left

  324. daniel has joined

  325. goffi has left

  326. SouL has left

  327. moparisthebest has joined

  328. suzyo has joined

  329. SouL has joined

  330. lovetox has joined

  331. Ge0rG has joined

  332. hannes has left

  333. suzyo has joined

  334. hannes has joined

  335. lumi has left

  336. matlag has left

  337. lskdjf has left

  338. ralphm has left

  339. lskdjf has left

  340. Alex has joined

  341. lskdjf has left

  342. lskdjf has left

  343. lskdjf has joined

  344. marc

    Ge0rG, ?action=roster;preauth=TOKEN ?

  345. Ge0rG

    marc: no, `?roster;preauth=TOKEN`

  346. Ge0rG

    marc: I the action string is `roster`

  347. marc

    Now we're at the beginning :D

  348. Ge0rG

    marc: not at all

  349. marc

    Ge0rG, we discussed the action stuff already and got to the point where we both agreed that we don't want the "roster" action :)

  350. Ge0rG

    marc: yes, but then I reread https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0379.html#link_generation and realized it's the missing link

  351. marc

    And now you're convinced that we should use ?roster ?

  352. Ge0rG

    marc: I'm now more indifferent to using `roster` or ``

  353. marc has left

  354. @Alacer has left

  355. @Alacer has joined

  356. marc has left

  357. marc

    Ge0rG, I would use "roster" for optical reason :D

  358. SamWhited

    I've got a meeting later to (hopefully) convince work to book me a ticket to FOSDEM; we have cheap-ish flights from here to Frankfurt, Amsterdam, and probably a few other places. Anyone on that side of the pond know where it's easiest/cheapest to catch a train to the summit/FOSDEM so I can give work some rough price estimates?

  359. ralphm has left

  360. SamWhited

    (flying to Brussels directly is way more expensive for whatever reason)

  361. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: probably more expensive because of EU administration

  362. mathieui

    fyi tickets from paris were fairly cheap last time I looked

  363. SamWhited

    That would probably be a good option too; I think flying there is relatively cheap

  364. mathieui

    amsterdam-brussels looks like ~50€

  365. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: a one direction train ride FFM-Brussels is ~3hrs and 70-125€, depending on rate

  366. mathieui

    SamWhited, https://www.trainline.eu/ has most regional prices for western europe

  367. ralphm has joined

  368. tux has left

  369. Holger has left

  370. Holger has joined

  371. mathieui

    damn, the price of the train tickets doubled since two weeks ago

  372. SamWhited

    I should book this soon… I hate coordinating trips like this.

  373. remko

    SamWhited: AFAIK, there should be belgian trains from amsterdam, but not frankfurt.

  374. remko

    SamWhited: Belgian trains are www.belgianrail.be

  375. SamWhited

    Yah, looks like I'd have to go to Cologne and transfer if I did FRA

  376. SamWhited

    AMS looks the cheapest overall anyways though; or I could be super cheap and take a bus from there.

  377. remko

    there are also trains to cologne, yes

  378. SamWhited

    Although I wouldn't mind accidentally getting stuck for a day or two in Paris on my way back if I were to do that… and it's not much more expensive

  379. Ge0rG

    German trains are pretty expensive, though

  380. remko

    the train to cologne is belgian

  381. SamWhited

    Actually, I wouldn't mind exploring Amsterdam either, so I guess either would be fine

  382. daniel

    SamWhited: there is also one from Frankfurt Main station to Brussels. Not sure if that's better than transferring in Cologne though

  383. remko

    but yeah, getting from frankfurt to there might be expensive

  384. SamWhited

    daniel: I think that one was more expensive, let me pull it up again

  385. SamWhited

    yah, roughly twice the price

  386. Ge0rG

    bus from FRA to Brussels would be ~20€

  387. mathieui

    yeah but like 10 hours or something?

  388. Ge0rG

    not sure you want to have a 6-7hr trip though.

  389. SamWhited

    yah, if I'm doing the bus I'm doing FRA

  390. SamWhited

    err, AMS

  391. SamWhited

    too many airports

  392. Ge0rG

    Why can't we route XSF participants via XMPP?

  393. Ge0rG

    Why can't we route XSF Summit participants via XMPP?

  394. Kev

    I've just realised it's quicker (by a margin) for me to fly Cardiff to Amsterdam and Amsterdam to Brussels than to go to Brussels by train.

  395. remko

    SamWhited: Frankfurt is also twice as far away from brussels than amsterdam. So Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam, Eindhoven are your best bets for airports.

  396. jjrh

    Can one remotely attend the XSF fosdem?

  397. remko

    Kev: including waiting time in airports?

  398. Kev

    Seems to.

  399. Ge0rG

    jjrh: yes, there's Cisco WebEx.

  400. SamWhited

    Train ride time doesn't count, because I'm 5 and riding trains is the best (maybe it wears off if you live somewhere that actually has reasonable trains though)

  401. remko

    there's also ecological footprint to bear in mind ;)

  402. edhelas

    for https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0157.html is it possible to put MUC as well ? I'd like to put our chatroom for support-addresses

  403. jjrh

    Awesome (minus the webex part)

  404. mathieui

    SamWhited, don’t forget to add like 10-15€ for paris tickets though (it’s stupidly expensive)

  405. SamWhited

    *nods* I'm not actually sure if they'd care about that, but I figured I might as well give them the lowest prices I can find while trying to convince them

  406. Kev

    TBH, the worst part of the trip back is usually getting up early and getting to the station, which would be no better (actually worse) getting to the airport instead.

  407. Kev

    I usually leave the hotel 'early' and get back home late afternoon.

  408. Ge0rG

    edhelas: "This contact information may include email addresses, web URLs, and JabberIDs" - I see no reason not to give a MUC with "?join"

  409. remko

    Kev: and more stress. Flying is always more stress, and less legroom :)

  410. mathieui

    yeah, that

  411. mathieui

    more stress, more processes and lineups, and less legroom

  412. mathieui

    (and expensive water)

  413. Kev

    This is all getting close. I probably have to start thinking seriously about booking stuff next week. Do we have venues and hotels arranged yet?

  414. Ge0rG probably had some 20.000km of train rides last year. That does wear off.

  415. SamWhited

    Flying's not so bad if you're not in the U.S., but I still hate it. Trains I can find a table, order food, and have a surface to put my laptop on

  416. daniel

    Train prices are unpredictable unfortunately. I'm paying 22 Euro for Dresden Brussels. That's 700km and a 9 hour train ride by high speed train

  417. jjrh

    SamWhited, flying in Canada is still a crappy experience.

  418. remko

    i was expecting the IC option from amsterdam to be cheapest, but apparently, the high speed train is cheaper

  419. remko

    so yeah, very unpredictable

  420. mathieui

    well, still more predictable than planes

  421. lskdjf has left

  422. lskdjf has joined

  423. edhelas

    Ge0rG yeah I though the same

  424. lskdjf has joined

  425. lskdjf has joined

  426. lskdjf has joined

  427. Ge0rG

    edhelas: I'm actually pondering about doing the same for yax.im.

  428. edhelas


  429. Ge0rG

    edhelas: you could just display the link and reuse xmpp: linkification

  430. ralphm has joined

  431. lskdjf has left

  432. daniel

    If you are into trains you should take the FRA - Cologne - Brussels trains instead of FRA - Frankfurt central - Brussels. Because the FRA - Cologne section is one of the few sections where the high speed trains actually reach their top speed. And the FRA train station is amazing. It's predominantly severed by high speed trains and just seeing the trains enter the station is amazing in itself.

  433. SamWhited

    that's tempting me to do that instead of AMS

  434. lskdjf has left

  435. lskdjf has left

  436. lskdjf has left

  437. lskdjf has left

  438. remko

    on the other hand, in amsterdam, you can legally get cannabis :)

  439. remko

    you know, the other kind of trainspotting

  440. SamWhited

    I see what you did there…

  441. daniel

    remko: I don't think that's a good argument these days for Americans

  442. SamWhited

    In Austin it's "illegal", but also invisible to cops, which is very convenient

  443. SamWhited

    But yah, that's what Colorado is for

  444. moparisthebest has left

  445. Kev

    There's no good argument for Americans.

  446. Kev

    Oh, right, I see what you mean.

  447. SamWhited

    *snort* it's true

  448. zinid has left

  449. lskdjf has left

  450. moparisthebest

    my only question is if it's invisible to cops, if you wrap something in it, does that become invisible too?

  451. lskdjf has left

  452. lskdjf has joined

  453. moparisthebest has left

  454. lskdjf has left

  455. SamWhited

    Tentatively added myself to the summit list since I'm reasonably sure I can convince work with this. Hotel is still a problem until we know what the group discount is though.

  456. lskdjf has left

  457. Kev

    Do we have a hotel sorted, then?

  458. Kev heads off to the wiki

  459. SamWhited

    not as far as I know, that's always the problem for me. Work wants to book early and at the same time I book a flight, but hotel isn't done until a week or so before

  460. Zash

    That is the question

  461. SamWhited

    And by "always" I mean "last year and this year"

  462. daniel

    Kev: according to my logs Guus signed something and sent it over but is still waiting to hear back from them

  463. Kev

    SamWhited: Yeah, it wasn't always this way.

  464. daniel

    That's a lot entry from the 28th though

  465. Tobias has joined

  466. Kev

    Oh, yes, wiki says it's the Thon again.

  467. daniel has left

  468. Ge0rG

    daniel: I don't think you get to go through Frankfurt main station if you are going from the airport to Cologne

  469. daniel has joined

  470. daniel

    Ge0rG: I was talking about the airport station (FRA)

  471. Ge0rG

    daniel: ah, alright then. Don't have special memories about that one, though the Frankfurt skyline is rather impressive.

  472. Ge0rG

    But yeah, FRA->Cologne is the track where you can actually go 300km/h

  473. daniel

    Ge0rG: I guess you are not into trains then 😀

  474. Ge0rG

    daniel: as I said, I'm travelling around 20k km per year by train ;)

  475. SamWhited has joined

  476. daniel

    And as far as skylines are concerned I prefer the ride into Cologne. Less pretentious 😀

  477. SamWhited

    Cologne is less pretentious? That's impressive

  478. Ge0rG

    SamWhited: frankfurt is full of bankster skyscrapers, cologne has a rather classic appeal

  479. daniel

    I'm from Cologne I should say

  480. tux has joined

  481. daniel

    So there might be some bias

  482. SamWhited

    Yah, but Cologne is known for Eau de Cologne, and nothing is more pretentious than that!

  483. lumi has joined

  484. ralphm has left

  485. Martin has left

  486. ralphm has joined

  487. suzyo has joined

  488. Kev has left

  489. hannes has joined

  490. moparisthebest has left

  491. Alex has left

  492. Alex has joined

  493. ralphm has joined

  494. ralphm has joined

  495. daniel has left

  496. daniel has joined

  497. Syndace has left

  498. Syndace has joined

  499. Guus has left

  500. Guus has joined

  501. ralphm has left

  502. Guus has left

  503. Guus has joined

  504. hannes has left

  505. hannes has joined

  506. daniel has left

  507. daniel has joined

  508. Guus has left

  509. SamWhited

    Some SCAM person may want to try and put us on this list: https://fosdem.org/2018/fringe/

  510. SamWhited

    Which I just found out was a thing

  511. waqas has joined

  512. waqas has left

  513. Alex has left

  514. Kev

    Maybe. It's not clear that it would be good to do so, at least to me.

  515. Kev

    If we assume that anyone actively involved in the community already knows about the summit, that means someone finding us on Fringe is someone not actively involved. If they're an active XMPP person who just happens to be outside the community, them knowing about the Summit might be great.

  516. ralphm has joined

  517. Kev

    But if they're a person with a bit of an interest and wants to come along to find out what we're about, the Summit might not be an inviting place for them.

  518. Kev

    Lots of strong opinions, very technical discussions, sometimes getting a bit heated, with little time for someone to get up to speed on what's going on.

  519. Kev

    5 minutes at the stand at FOSDEM would probably be better outreach for them.

  520. Kev

    Your milage may reasonably vary :)

  521. SamWhited

    I would assume that new people who don't know anything about XMPP wouldn't read that page with a description on it and then decide to go (and if they did they'd know what they were getting into)

  522. daniel has left

  523. daniel has joined

  524. SamWhited

    And if they don't, it doesn't stop most people who won't go from seeing the booth

  525. zinid has left

  526. jabberatdemo has joined

  527. Ge0rG has joined

  528. Kev

    I realise you can reasonably make the argument that it's good to put us there. I don't agree, but this isn't a thing where I'm clearly right and you're clearly wrong :)

  529. jabberatdemo has left

  530. Ge0rG has left

  531. Ge0rG has left

  532. ralphm has joined

  533. waqas has joined

  534. Ge0rG has left

  535. hannes has joined

  536. Ge0rG has left

  537. daniel has left

  538. daniel has joined

  539. suzyo has joined

  540. lumi has left

  541. ralphm has left

  542. goffi has left

  543. daniel has left

  544. daniel has joined

  545. ralphm has joined

  546. hannes has left

  547. hannes has joined

  548. jjrh has left

  549. suzyo has joined

  550. Guus has joined

  551. ralphm has joined

  552. jjrh has left

  553. ralphm has joined

  554. jjrh has left

  555. moparisthebest has left

  556. SamWhited has left

  557. remko has left

  558. ralphm has left

  559. daniel has left

  560. daniel has joined

  561. zinid has joined

  562. ralphm has joined

  563. Alex has joined

  564. marc has left

  565. pep.

    Is this up-to-date? https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XSF_Infrastructure Some services are using docker now right? And systems on the machines seem particularly old

  566. moparisthebest has left

  567. hannes has joined

  568. moparisthebest has joined

  569. valo has left

  570. Holger has left

  571. Ge0rG has left

  572. Holger has joined

  573. hannes has left

  574. hannes has joined

  575. marc has left

  576. hannes has left

  577. hannes has joined

  578. Alex has left