XSF Discussion - 2018-11-17

  1. lovetox_ has left
  2. Zash has left
  3. Zash has left
  4. UsL has left
  5. UsL has joined
  6. SamWhited has left
  7. lnj has left
  8. lskdjf has joined
  9. SamWhited has left
  10. vanitasvitae has left
  11. l has joined
  12. vanitasvitae has joined
  13. lskdjf has joined
  14. matlag has left
  15. lnj has left
  16. j.r has left
  17. j.r has joined
  18. waqas has joined
  19. waqas has left
  20. lskdjf has joined
  21. lovetox has left
  22. ta has left
  23. lnj has left
  24. l has joined
  25. l has left
  26. l has left
  27. l has left
  28. matlag has left
  29. lumi has left
  30. matlag has left
  31. j.r has left
  32. j.r has joined
  33. lskdjf has left
  34. lskdjf has left
  35. l has left
  36. j.r has left
  37. j.r has joined
  38. lskdjf has left
  39. j.r has left
  40. matlag has left
  41. j.r has joined
  42. SamWhited has left
  43. UsL has left
  44. UsL has joined
  45. jjrh has left
  46. alacer has joined
  47. jjrh has left
  48. mimi89999 has left
  49. Ge0rG has left
  50. pep. has left
  51. ThibG has joined
  52. j.r has joined
  53. j.r has joined
  54. Ge0rG has left
  55. alacer has left
  56. alacer has joined
  57. valo has left
  58. valo has joined
  59. jjrh has left
  60. jjrh has left
  61. alacer has left
  62. alacer has joined
  63. Yagiza has joined
  64. alacer has left
  65. alacer has joined
  66. lorddavidiii has joined
  67. alacer has left
  68. Yagiza has left
  69. Yagiza has joined
  70. jjrh has left
  71. jjrh has left
  72. ThibG has joined
  73. ta has joined
  74. jjrh has left
  75. alacer has joined
  76. waqas has joined
  77. jjrh has left
  78. jjrh has left
  79. alacer has left
  80. guusdk has left
  81. j.r has left
  82. guusdk has left
  83. guusdk has joined
  84. j.r has joined
  85. guusdk has left
  86. guusdk has joined
  87. guusdk has left
  88. guusdk has joined
  89. guusdk has left
  90. Neustradamus has left
  91. mimi89999 has joined
  92. guusdk has left
  93. guusdk has joined
  94. lovetox has joined
  95. MattJ has joined
  96. Yagiza has left
  97. blabla has joined
  98. rion has left
  99. Neustradamus has left
  100. rion has left
  101. rion has left
  102. rion has left
  103. Holger has left
  104. Nekit has joined
  105. guusdk has left
  106. guusdk has joined
  107. rion has left
  108. Yagiza has joined
  109. rion has left
  110. blabla has joined
  111. rion has left
  112. Neustradamus has left
  113. rion has left
  114. blabla has joined
  115. marc has joined
  116. lorddavidiii has left
  117. labdsf has left
  118. sonny has joined
  119. rion has left
  120. alacer has joined
  121. labdsf has joined
  122. rion has left
  123. alacer has left
  124. alacer has joined
  125. waqas has left
  126. waqas has joined
  127. Alex has joined
  128. waqas has left
  129. rion has left
  130. daniel has left
  131. lnj has joined
  132. daniel has left
  133. daniel has left
  134. alacer has left
  135. blabla has joined
  136. ThibG has joined
  137. daniel has left
  138. daniel has left
  139. goffi has joined
  140. daniel has left
  141. APach has left
  142. ThibG has joined
  143. APach has joined
  144. genofire has left
  145. Alex has left
  146. Maranda has joined
  147. daniel has left
  148. Maranda has joined
  149. blabla has joined
  150. daniel has left
  151. winfried has left
  152. winfried has joined
  153. Syndace has joined
  154. j.r has joined
  155. j.r has joined
  156. guusdk has left
  157. guusdk has joined
  158. lumi has joined
  159. vanitasvitae has left
  160. vanitasvitae has joined
  161. daniel has left
  162. Syndace has joined
  163. guusdk has left
  164. sonny has joined
  165. l has left
  166. l has joined
  167. Alex has joined
  168. guusdk has left
  169. rion has left
  170. guusdk has left
  171. guusdk has left
  172. guusdk has joined
  173. 404.city has joined
  174. 404.city has left
  175. jonas’ has left
  176. jonas’ has joined
  177. jonas’ has joined
  178. Maranda has joined
  179. Maranda has joined
  180. l has joined
  181. Maranda has left
  182. Maranda has joined
  183. tux has joined
  184. Holger has left
  185. Kev has left
  186. Alex has left
  187. mimi89999 has joined
  188. 404.city has joined
  189. alacer has joined
  190. ThibG has joined
  191. ThibG has joined
  192. marc has left
  193. marc has joined
  194. alacer has left
  195. lnj has left
  196. 404.city has left
  197. Syndace has joined
  198. 404.city has joined
  199. Zash has left
  200. rion has left
  201. Zash has left
  202. flow has left
  203. lnj has left
  204. vanitasvitae has left
  205. Ge0rG When doing multiple follow-up LMCs, do I reference the original message id or the follow-up message id?
  206. vanitasvitae has left
  207. Ge0rG > A single message may be corrected multiple times by subsequent edits. The XEP doesn't quite tackle that explicitly
  208. jonas’ Ge0rG, the original
  209. Ge0rG Aslo should a client allow both?
  210. jonas’ IMO, no
  211. Ge0rG I think yaxim will overwrite the stanza ID with the correction's ID.
  212. Ge0rG I mean a _receiving_ client
  213. Link Mauve poezio does the same.
  214. Ge0rG so poezio will correct the last correction and not the original message?
  215. Ge0rG So it means I need to support both?
  216. Link Mauve The semantics are defined as replacing the message.
  217. Link Mauve This includes the id.
  218. Ge0rG Who promoted that shit to Draft?
  219. jonas’ Link Mauve, only payloads though
  220. Link Mauve We have a linked list of older versions in the case the user wants to see a previous version, but we don’t recognise the old id as part of the discussion anymore.
  221. jonas’ > It is expected that the receiver SHOULD then treat the new stanza as complete replacement for all the payloads received in the original stanza.
  222. jonas’ > for all the payloads
  223. jonas’ the @id is arguably not payload
  224. Link Mauve Ugh, I guess I missed that.
  225. pep. Would it be possible to get stuff, fliers/stickers/stuff to put on the table to say "Here is the XMPP assembly" (that I can maybe build with stickers myself)
  226. pep. for the CCC
  227. Ge0rG pep.: SCAM team?
  228. pep. scam@ ?
  229. pep. https://signup.c3assemblies.de/assembly/982f5ea6-fcea-4c1e-965d-8ef478149ac0 ! (wondering if others can see that)
  230. rion has left
  231. rion has left
  232. rion has left
  233. rion has left
  234. rion has left
  235. lnj has left
  236. alacer has joined
  237. alacer has left
  238. alacer has joined
  239. guusdk has left
  240. guusdk has left
  241. guusdk has joined
  242. rion has left
  243. guusdk has left
  244. guusdk has joined
  245. alacer has left
  246. daniel has left
  247. guusdk has left
  248. guusdk has joined
  249. rion has left
  250. rion has left
  251. guusdk has left
  252. guusdk has joined
  253. lumi has left
  254. lskdjf has left
  255. l has left
  256. l has joined
  257. l has joined
  258. lskdjf has joined
  259. j.r has joined
  260. 404.city has left
  261. blabla has left
  262. Alex has joined
  263. Holger has left
  264. vanitasvitae has left
  265. vanitasvitae has joined
  266. Zash has left
  267. 404.city has joined
  268. j.r has joined
  269. Zash has left
  270. Zash has joined
  271. Zash has left
  272. Zash has joined
  273. Zash has left
  274. Zash has joined
  275. moparisthebest has joined
  276. Ge0rG jonas’: how does JabberCat handle that correction-of-correction?
  277. jonas’ it doesn’t implement LMC yet
  278. jonas’ but in my mental model I was expecting to see the original ID
  279. Ge0rG lovetox: which message ID does Gajim referene on a correction of a correction?
  280. Ge0rG Conversations also corrects the last ID and not the original one
  281. jonas’ meh
  282. jonas’ then we’re doomed
  283. guusdk has left
  284. guusdk has left
  285. guusdk has joined
  286. Zash Doooomed
  287. flow or we could make a list of the pros and cons of the different approaches and after careful evaluation aggree on exactly one
  288. jonas’ flow, that sounds good
  289. jonas’ Ge0rG, would you care to take it to the list?
  290. Ge0rG jonas’: you are lagging
  291. jonas’ sorry :)
  292. rion has left
  293. Ge0rG I should keep a list somewhere of my questions to standards@ that never got answered
  294. jonas’ Ge0rG, you got an answer!
  295. jonas’ (but the list is probably still processing it)
  296. rion has left
  297. rion has left
  298. flow he said blockchain!
  299. jonas’ :)
  300. rion has left
  301. MattJ I'm surprised it got through the spam filters
  302. jonas’ hah
  303. l has joined
  304. matlag has left
  305. rion has left
  306. moparisthebest has joined
  307. rion has left
  308. Ge0rG > he said blockchain! ITYM Smart Contracts
  309. rion has left
  310. lskdjf has left
  311. moparisthebest has left
  312. lskdjf has left
  313. moparisthebest has joined
  314. lskdjf has joined
  315. waqas has joined
  316. rion has left
  317. Alex has left
  318. !xsf_martin has joined
  319. Alex has joined
  320. lovetox Gajim corrects the last message
  321. lovetox i always thought its pretty clear what that means
  322. lovetox protocol wise the last message that was sent out by the client
  323. lovetox not what the user may think was the last message or what the UI shows him as last message
  324. jonas’ that’s also a nice rationale
  325. lovetox this all does not change though that the XEP allows to correct every message
  326. lovetox not only the last
  327. lovetox its just a recommendation
  328. jonas’ requiring to correct the original @id and forgetting about the correction @id makes not-last message correction consistent though
  329. Maranda has joined
  330. jonas’ otherwise you can make a tree of corrections :)
  331. jonas’ (well, you could also specify to forget the original @id and only keep the corrected one to fix that tree)
  332. lovetox i always thought this works good, you basically make a linked list of messages, every message references the one before with a correction
  333. daniel I forget the old one
  334. jonas’ also, lovetox, daniel, to standards@ please
  335. jonas’ otherwise Ge0rG is sad that he doesn’t get on-list replies ;-)
  336. daniel lovetox: so just to be clear about. When you correct for the second time you correct the id of the previous connection not the original one?
  337. lovetox yes
  338. daniel *Previous correction
  339. Maranda has joined
  340. lovetox the last message protocol wise
  341. Ge0rG daniel: you are still listening, right?
  342. lovetox the last message i sent out
  343. daniel Then four clients independently made the same decision
  344. daniel That seems pretty clear to me
  345. daniel I mean we can clear up the xep
  346. jonas’ yes please
  347. Ge0rG BLOCKCHAIN!
  348. jonas’ I would’ve implemented it differently
  349. Ge0rG but jonas’ is right, this implies a tree and not a list
  350. daniel Not if you forget the old one
  351. daniel Which lovetox and I are doing
  352. Ge0rG but if we always reference the original, this is a star topology
  353. jonas’ flattened by timestamps
  354. Ge0rG daniel: "forgetting" is an important point BTW, what if you only have the last N messages, and the original is N+1
  355. Ge0rG and are you keeping the timestamp?
  356. daniel Not sure about timestamps
  357. jonas’ Ge0rG, then you already know which IDs you can ignore :)
  358. daniel I think I might use the new timestamp
  359. daniel But I can check later
  360. Ge0rG in yaxim, the correction timestamp overrides the original one, moving the LMC to the bottom of the chat
  361. lovetox Ge0rG, you cant know what message i want to correct
  362. lovetox i send you a message with a reference to an id
  363. lovetox and you correct that
  364. lovetox you have to pre prepared to get a message referencing the last message you received
  365. daniel Can I propose YMC again
  366. jonas’ YMC?
  367. daniel Yolo message correction
  368. daniel Anyone can correct any message
  369. jonas’ oh dear
  370. Ge0rG lovetox: I lost you.
  371. lovetox i dont know why you care what message i correct
  372. lovetox "the original" or some other message
  373. lovetox when implementing that i didnt spend one thought about what messge another clients wants to correct and if its a original or not
  374. jonas’ lovetox, the question is then how you decide what is displayed, maybe?
  375. jonas’ I don’t konw, I can’t follow
  376. lovetox message comes in -> has id ref -> look is that id the last message for that client -> yes -> overwrite that message in gui
  377. jonas’ which would break if your interpretation of what constitutes the "last message" diverged from everyone elses (which it doesn’t)
  378. Maranda has joined
  379. jonas’ i.e. if everyone (except you) agreed that replacement does not create a new "last mesasge" and thus would be using @id of the original message, you wouldn’t be able to handle re-corrections at all (because your flow would discard it because it’s not hte "last message")
  380. jonas’ and this is why it’s sensible to think about this
  381. lovetox correct
  382. jonas’ you just got lucky that your intuition matched that of others :)
  383. jonas’ (mine didn’t)
  384. lovetox in my opinion this is a easy to follow rule that every client can check
  385. lovetox the last message i received over the wire
  386. lovetox every other definition depends on what you do with your UI
  387. lovetox what you show the user
  388. lovetox what you do in your db
  389. jonas’ not really
  390. jonas’ also
  391. jonas’ by that argument
  392. marc has left
  393. jonas’ do you allow corrections after you have seen Chat STate Notifications from a client?
  394. marc has joined
  395. jonas’ or Chat Markers
  396. jonas’ which are also messages
  397. lovetox thats not what i meant
  398. jonas’ but it’s the same thing :)
  399. lovetox obviously we talking about stuff that has a body
  400. jonas’ not that obvious
  401. lovetox my point is
  402. jonas’ you could treat corrections as meta-message just like CSN or Markers, apply its effect (replace previous messages payload) and not include it in the "messages" array.
  403. jonas’ it is not that obvious, is all I’m saying
  404. lovetox how should i know that if i reference a id that is 3 messages back, is till the last message for your client?
  405. jonas’ dinner
  406. jonas’ because you don’t include the corrections in your list of "messages"
  407. rion has left
  408. rion has left
  409. 404.city has left
  410. guusdk has left
  411. lovetox > A single message may be corrected multiple times by subsequent edits.
  412. lovetox for me this is just stating that this is possible
  413. Ge0rG lovetox: your ML message is as ambiguous as what you write in here. I can't follow you
  414. lovetox what is ambiguous?
  415. Ge0rG lovetox: in terms of the two examples you provided to Андрей, which one is Gajim sending out, and which one of those it understands when receiving?
  416. lovetox that post was a question to the list
  417. lovetox and not to answer your question
  418. lovetox see my other ML reply to answer your question
  419. Ge0rG lovetox: but your answer to my question also didn't answer my question
  420. lovetox whats not clear about it?
  421. lovetox how can the "last message that is sent over the wire" be ambiguous
  422. lovetox ?
  423. Ge0rG lovetox: so you reference the id of the last correction?
  424. Ge0rG or rather, previous correction
  425. lovetox yes
  426. lovetox i dont see the value in the other approach, instead of just checking the last message, you would have to check all messages between the original and the last correction
  427. Zash has left
  428. lovetox you must check that all these messages are corrections of the original, otherwise you would have to deny the correction
  429. Ge0rG how will Gajim handle a received message correcting the original ID?
  430. lovetox it denys all messages that dont reference the last message that was received
  431. lovetox deny meaning its displayed not as correction
  432. Ge0rG thanks
  433. lovetox thats my idea of it, i never put it to a test in gajim though ^^
  434. lovetox my idea how the code should work, and what it actually does are sometimes not the same thing
  435. !xsf_martin has left
  436. goffi Hello. In XEP-0198 what happen if client specify a prefered maximum resumption time ("max" attribute) and server specify an other one? I don't see the point of having 2 different values (except if the server has a default value and overwritte it by client prefered value, but nothing like that is specified).
  437. sonny has joined
  438. guusdk has left
  439. Holger goffi: The client can specify a desired value, but the server decides.
  440. goffi Holger: OK thanks, in this case the formulation in the XEP is bad, it states "he <enabled/> element MAY include a 'max' attribute to specify the server's preferred maximum resumption time.", it's not preferred value, it's authority value: the one which will be used.
  441. Maranda has joined
  442. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  443. Holger goffi: Revision 0.7 had this: > the <sm/> element MUST include a 'max' attribute that specifies the longest allowable time period for session resumption (in seconds). https://xmpp.org/extensions/attic/xep-0198-0.7.html
  444. Holger I guess in the end it's not really interesting for clients. I guess they'll usually just try to resume as fast as possible, and they must be prepared to handle a <failed/> resumption no matter whether they're within the 'max' time period or not.
  445. lovetox yeah, i dont see how this is useful for the client
  446. moparisthebest has joined
  447. moparisthebest has joined
  448. Andrew Nenakhov has left
  449. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  450. blabla has left
  451. lumi has joined
  452. rion has left
  453. labdsf has left
  454. Link Mauve has left
  455. krauq has joined
  456. krauq has joined
  457. Link Mauve has joined
  458. daniel has left
  459. SamWhited has left
  460. Andrew Nenakhov has left
  461. labdsf has joined
  462. daniel has left
  463. daniel has left
  464. daniel has left
  465. goffi Holger: it's interesting for client to know when the session can be deleted.
  466. goffi I don't think it's really interesting to specify, as the server have authority anyway, but knowing when the session ends is useful, and it should be a "MUST" and not a "MAY" in my opinion (in <enabled/>).
  467. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  468. Maranda has left
  469. daniel has left
  470. Holger goffi: At least with ejabberd, the timeout for a given session can change after <enabled/>, so I'm not sure ejabberd could adhere to such a MUST clause.
  471. goffi Holger: how does it changes ?
  472. Holger The server can be configured in a way that enabling of push notifications increases the timeout drastically. And then when an actual push notification is generated, the original timeout is restored. Stuff like that.
  473. efrit has joined
  474. matlag has left
  475. efrit has left
  476. efrit has joined
  477. Syndace has joined
  478. blabla has left
  479. vanitasvitae has left
  480. Syndace has joined
  481. Zash has left
  482. Zash has left
  483. Zash has joined
  484. Andrew Nenakhov has left
  485. Zash has left
  486. Zash has joined
  487. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  488. Zash has left
  489. Zash has joined
  490. tux has joined
  491. lorddavidiii has joined
  492. marc has left
  493. marc has joined
  494. Syndace has joined
  495. vanitasvitae has left
  496. labdsf has left
  497. labdsf has joined
  498. Syndace has joined
  499. lskdjf has left
  500. labdsf has left
  501. vaulor has left
  502. Yagiza has left
  503. APach has left
  504. Alex has left
  505. matlag has left
  506. labdsf has joined
  507. matlag has left
  508. matlag has left
  509. Andrew Nenakhov has left
  510. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  511. Alex has joined
  512. Andrew Nenakhov has joined
  513. Zash has left
  514. APach has joined
  515. sonny has joined
  516. pep. has left
  517. SamWhited has left
  518. moparisthebest has joined
  519. moparisthebest has joined
  520. blabla has joined
  521. lovetox_ has joined
  522. j.r has left
  523. marc has left
  524. j.r has joined
  525. SamWhited has left
  526. SamWhited has joined
  527. lovetox_ has left
  528. lovetox_ has joined
  529. lovetox_ has left
  530. lovetox_ has joined
  531. lovetox_ has left
  532. lovetox_ has joined
  533. lovetox_ has left
  534. marc has joined
  535. sonny has joined
  536. j.r has left
  537. j.r has joined
  538. lorddavidiii has left
  539. lorddavidiii has joined
  540. lovetox has left
  541. marc has left
  542. lnj has left
  543. j.r has left
  544. j.r has joined
  545. vaulor has joined
  546. ta has joined
  547. j.r has left
  548. j.r has joined
  549. lorddavidiii has left
  550. marc has joined
  551. SamWhited has left
  552. lnj has left
  553. Zash has left
  554. thorsten has left
  555. Nekit has joined
  556. thorsten has joined
  557. SamWhited has joined
  558. thorsten has left
  559. j.r has left
  560. Zash has left
  561. j.r has left
  562. vaulor has left
  563. vaulor has joined
  564. j.r has joined
  565. Zash has left
  566. Zash has left
  567. Zash has left
  568. j.r has left
  569. j.r has joined
  570. thorsten has joined
  571. jjrh has left