XSF Discussion - 2018-07-09


  1. Yagiza

    Hello!

  2. MattJ

    Hi!

  3. jonasw

    Ohai!

  4. Yagiza

    There is an interesting question here... What to do with MUC participant list, when client leaves the room because of connection error? Is it a good idea to cleanup the list, or maybe leave them all, but display offline, or maybe keep the list in it's last state before we disconnected?

  5. jonasw

    Yagiza, I clear it

  6. Yagiza

    Psi displays last state, Vacuum-IM and eyeCU cleans up.

  7. Yagiza

    Did any1 ever discussed it?

  8. Yagiza

    Or every1 just do as he likes.

  9. jonasw

    "any1"?

  10. daniel

    Conversations always displays the full member list in members only rooms. So offline members are shown as such

  11. Yagiza

    Anyone

  12. daniel

    But I don't think you should display everyone who has ever joined a muc as offline in that list

  13. daniel

    Especially since you can't identify if someone rejoined with a different nick

  14. Yagiza

    Yes. We are choosing between "keep displaying last state" or "clear list".

  15. MattJ

    daniel, I think you have the same misunderstanding as I originally did: Yagiza is asking about displaying the participants in the local client when the local client is disconnected

  16. daniel

    Oh

  17. Yagiza

    Yeah!

  18. Ge0rG

    In theory, you should be able to store pending outgoing PMs to other participants when offline, allowing the user to type... Of course you can not be sure if they will be there when you return, but there are the same reace conditions while being online.

  19. MattJ

    So... removing one word from a XEP that leads to people misinterpreting it

  20. MattJ

    Is that an editorial change I can just make a PR for? Does it need a revision bump?

  21. Zash

    What was the word?

  22. MattJ

    "initial"

  23. MattJ

    In the context of the response, the words "initial query" are used to refer to "the query at the start of the results"

  24. MattJ

    But it easily leads to the interpretation (which is already difficult enough to avoid) that there is such a thing as an "initial query" and a "page query"

  25. SamWhited

    Sounds editorial to me

  26. jonasw

    MattJ, is this about RSM?

  27. jonasw

    in any case: make a PR with the change, I’ll add the revision block if I think it’s needed (and I may -- since it changes the interpretation many people seem to have initially (pun not intended), it makes sense to have a revision block for that so people can clear up their confusion using the attic)

  28. MattJ

    It's about MAM

  29. Kev

    > Is that an editorial change I can just make a PR for? Does it need a revision bump? All changes need a revision bump, whether editorial or not, just a question of which version part gets bumped.

  30. jonasw

    reminds me to update the atitc

  31. MattJ

    Kev, pretty sure grammar fixes and typos haven't had revision bumps in the past

  32. Ge0rG needs to add some real content into 0379

  33. Kev

    They might not have, but they should.

  34. Kev

    We agreed a few years ago that all changes would have version bumps from then on, and that particular versions would be immutable.

  35. MattJ

    Alright

  36. jonasw makes a mental note

  37. jonasw

    I’m pretty sure I haven’t version bumped some very trivial typo changes

  38. jonasw

    (and not updated the attic, either)

  39. jonasw

    (so it’s at least immutable)

  40. jonasw

    (once the next version has been released, it’ll be as if the typo fix was in that next version)

  41. jonasw

    actually, I think this isn’t the worst way to do things.

  42. Kev

    In this case, if we're talking about a change that makes the XEP less confusing, that means we're changing the perceived meaning and bumping seems particularly important.

  43. jonasw

    Kev, I agree

  44. jonasw

    I would definitely revision bump that as I explained above.

  45. Kev

    Properly trivial typos I can go either way on.

  46. jonasw

    but it feels awfully overheaddy to me to version bump a "fobar" -> "foobar" typo fix

  47. Kev

    When there's a process I think it's good to follow it, but ... as you say.