Ge0rGis subverting XEPs, one small commit at a time.
alacerhas joined
andyhas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
alacerhas left
rionhas joined
alacerhas joined
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
moparisthebesthas left
moparisthebesthas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
Alexhas left
flowrion, did you consider writing to standards@ and probably the xep authors in CC about the stuff you wrote regarding xep260 in the wiki? I am also interested about the rationale behind proxy-error. Unfortunately this appears to be another example where a XEP tells you what to do, but not why…
Alexhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Steve Killehas left
lnjhas left
lnjhas joined
nycohas left
Steve Killehas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
nycohas joined
rionflow: Hi. maybe in the evening. Working for now.
rionbtw at work I do some modifications in Janus server for our customer. and in its signaling has a special attribute for final local candidate. That's what missed in Jingle S5B
Dele Olajidehas joined
edhelasGe0rG are you slowly turining 0060 into MIX 😱
Ge0rGedhelas: I'm not touching 0060 with a pole.
kokonoehas left
kokonoehas joined
alacerhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
alacerhas joined
alacerhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rtq3has left
pep.There was a place in the RFCs that say thou shalt not add yourself to the roster, right? I can't find it
frainzhas left
alacerhas joined
frainzhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
alacerhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
blablahas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
rtq3has joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
vanitasvitaeCCC is demanding freedom for Assange, Manning and Bini: https://www.ccc.de/de/updates/2019/chaos-computer-club-besorgt-uber-aktuelle-angriffe-auf-die-pressefreiheit
vanitasvitae(Link in German)
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
UsLhas left
frainzhas left
rtq3has joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
frainzhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Douglas Terabytehas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
edhelasthey are preparing a nice conference for the 36c3 :p
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
waqashas left
waqashas joined
alacerhas joined
rtq3has joined
debaclehas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Douglas Terabytehas left
frainzhas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
frainzhas joined
waqashas left
waqashas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
404.cityhas joined
UsLhas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
andyhas left
andyhas joined
andyhas left
andyhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rionhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
winfriedhas left
rtq3has joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
UsLhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
404.cityhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rtq3has joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
winfriedhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
waqashas left
rtq3has joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
UsLhas joined
alacerhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
alacerhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
matlaghas left
matlaghas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
blablahas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
mr.fisterhas left
UsLhas left
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas joined
andyhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
mikaelahas left
mikaelahas joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
mr.fisterhas left
UsLhas joined
UsLhas left
UsLhas joined
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
alacerhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
larmahas left
larmahas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
alacerhas joined
rionhas joined
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas joined
jjrhhas left
jjrhhas joined
ThibGhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
peterhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
yvohas joined
peterhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
davidhas left
davidhas joined
davidhas left
davidhas joined
goffihas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
UsLhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
goffihas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
lovetoxhas joined
dwdvanitasvitae, Freeing Assange? Why?
neshtaxmpphas joined
goffihas left
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
ZashGe0rG: Do you think you'll find time to look at the 45 anti-gc changes or should I just post it to xsf/xeps ?
dwdvanitasvitae, I'd argue Ecuador should either charge him or release him. As for Assange, he skipped bail. I'm hoping Sweden put in an extradition claim, as that would take precedence over the US claim, but simply freeing Assange would break UK law quite clearly.
pep.I'm also hoping that Sweden puts in an extradition claim. I don't want to resolve the questions of the claims the US is making :/
Ge0rGIt is interesting how being locked into a building for seven years doesn't count as a jail sentence.
ZashI thought Sweden did so already
pep.Because journalists there seem really dumb about it and don't understand that throwing him under the bus could also affect them
dwdGe0rG, He wasn't locked in. He could leave at any time.
dwdZash, They might have, I've not been following.
rtq3has left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rtq3has joined
404.city Supporthas joined
UsLhas joined
waqashas joined
APachhas joined
rtq3has left
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rionhas left
rionhas joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
mr.fisterhas left
mr.fisterhas joined
UsLhas left
APachhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
karoshihas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
rionhas left
APachhas joined
debaclehas left
davidhas left
davidhas joined
yvohas joined
yvohas left
yvohas joined
jubalhhas joined
karoshihas joined
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
debaclehas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
rionhas joined
vanitasvitae> Ge0rG, He wasn't locked in. He could leave at any time.
Reminds me of that one prison cell from Game of Thrones...
rionWhat can I use to keep some personal settings per muc? Like if I ever want to receive notifications from a specific muc or if I want to load URLs' previews etc. Some extended bookmarks would be perfect probably.
lorddavidiiihas left
rtq3has joined
pep.Our bookmark XEPs are not really bookmarks.. They're more of a sync protocol hacked together. Maybe someday we'll have a real bookmark XEP ("This time it's really real")
pep.So you probably don't want that in there
jonas’rion, server-side notification settings are interesting for other reasons, as well, and one would probably want a protocol where the server is aware about what’s going on for push etc
peterhas joined
pep.yeah that'd be cool to have
Ge0rGpep.: the one thing that the Bookmarks XEP _doesn't_ do, is sync.
ZashNot even Bookmarks in PEP?
pep.Ge0rG, autojoin?
ZashWhat does "sync" even mean here?
pep.sync client state, joined or not joined
Ge0rGpep.: it's pull-based
pep.Ge0rG, yeah ok we're not talking about the same thing
Ge0rGpep.: never.
Ge0rGCan't you just stuff extension elements into Bookmarks?
ZashGe0rG: Sure you can.
Ge0rGZash: will they persist?
Ge0rGwill they persist another client adding a bookmark?
ZashExcellent question
Ge0rGI'm full of them.
ZashI can only tell you that Prosody will preserve whatever data you put there. I don't know about other servers or clients.
Ge0rGLet's put notification preferences into there.
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Ge0rGAlso for contacts.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Ge0rGOr even better: let's stuff them into pep.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Wojtekhas left
Lancehas joined
peterhas left
lovetoxGe0rG, gajim did that
lovetoxi removed it
lovetoxit just needs one client and your user loses his data
lovetoxthats not something i would build any features on
ZashThat applies to basically everything where data is moved between serialization and native data structures.
ZashLossy transforms, loss of data.
lovetoxyes but we do that not very often
lovetoxvcard comes to mind
lovetoxrion, you can use private storage
rionyep.
Ge0rGprivate PEP
lovetoxand i dont mean the private storage bookmark namespace
Ge0rGsomebody should define a format.
ZashGet it into Bookmarks 2 early
Ge0rGGet it into Roster 2
ZashBefore people start relying on non-extensible data structures
Ge0rGZash: did you say data forms?
ZashNoooooooooooooooooooooooo
Yagizahas left
rtq3has left
pep.“Ge0rG> Or even better: let's stuff them into pep.”, please don't stuff things in me
Ge0rGpep.: it's fortunately very easy to find the right balance between insulting you and plausible deniability.
rionhas left
Zashhttps://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/786 - does this qualify as editorial?
Alexhas joined
Ge0rGZash: is this merely the move? git diff isn't very good about showing moved paragraphs
Ge0rGZash: I suppose all I wanted to hear is "yes, I only moved the block down, promised!"
ZashGe0rG: I think I moved some sentences around to make it make sense, but I don't think any semantics are changed
!xsf_Martinhas left
Ge0rGDoes it make sense to vote on that before getting rid of all of GC1?
Zashoorrrrr
Zash-Compliant multi-user chat services MUST accept the foregoing as a
where "the foregoing" is GC 1.0 ...
Ge0rGNot that I think it will succeed
Ge0rGBecause somebody wanted to ensure removing GC1 doesn't "break things"
Alexhas left
ZashDo we care? Prosody doesn't follow XEP-0045 anymore since it rejects GC 1.0 joins.
dwdZash, Do you have any figures for how many rejected joins that's caused?
dwdZash, And perhaps more importantly, whether that figure changed when you stopped accepting GC-1?
Zashdwd: Very few.
ZashIIRC we only saw GC 1.0 joins from one client, which happened to be our own web chat.
ZashThe rest were all mis-identified presence updates
Ge0rGYes.
Ge0rGI've had similar stats on yax.im
ZashMabye there was some other old version of some random client I never heard of before that did gc1.0?
Ge0rG(I had it running for ~a week, and the GC1 joins were from prosody-chat.tar.gz or from clients that definitively support MUC join)
ZashSeems a small price to pay for not going out of sync when a join is mis-identified as a presence update.
ZashAnd that web chat was fixed, and then we switched to Converse.js
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
peterhas joined
Nekithas joined
dwdThen we drop GC-1.0 support from '45. Change it to MAY initially, perhaps?
yvohas left
Ge0rGMUST NOT.
dwdEventually, yes.
ZashHm, if there had been some way to signal that a complete state dump is being sent, it'd be easier.
Lancehas left
davidhas left
davidhas joined
Ge0rGZash: in GC1.0?
ZashGe0rG: in MUC
Ge0rGZash: I might have proposed something in that direction.
ZashA MUC client that sends a presence update that gets treated as a GC1.0 join might end up with stale presence from departed occupants.
Ge0rGZash: let me scrap some parts from the junkyard of standards@
Ge0rGI need a mutt macro for `/~f georg ~C standards ~s `
moparisthebesthas left
Ge0rGdwd: stats on GC1: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-April/034760.html
moparisthebesthas joined
Ge0rGZash: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-October/033501.html at the bottom, Proposed Solutions #3
Ge0rGI suppose I can take the fact that I can recite years old threads with solutions to problems that still come up as a lack of progress and general direction in the XSF.
ZashGe0rG: I'm not sure that's what I was thinking.
ZashI was thinking a thing from the server that says "you were desynced. please drop all state. full state follows"
ZashThen, if a presence update is treated as a join, it won't get out of sync
ZashCould also be useful in case of intermittent s2s problems or cluster merges
Ge0rGZash: how is the server supposed to know that you were desynced?
ZashGe0rG: It knows in the case of receiving a presence update from someone not in the room
Ge0rGZash: provided you deny the existence of GC1
wurstsalathas left
Ge0rGZash: and even in that case, how do you know that client can understand a full-state-reset?
ZashHence why such a thing would have been useful if it already existed.
Ge0rGZash: this is not how you evolve protocols
ZashAs it is now, I think just killing GC 1.0 is fine.
ZashGe0rG: How are we supposed to fix problems without time travel???? :P
Ge0rGZash: as sad as it is, the presence of these problems is a clear sign of the non-existence of time travel
lovetoxhas left
typikolhas joined
UsLhas joined
dwdGe0rG, Erm. But the Council agreed to removing GC-1.0 in principle, and asked for a PR: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-April/034768.html
Nekithas left
dwdGe0rG, It was unanimous and everything. And you promised to do a PR.
Ge0rGdwd: not quite. There was a long-ish discussion about whether it improves things.
Ge0rG> Kev is OK with this in principle, as long as it results in an improvement.
Ge0rG> ... OK with one that doesn't break anything, but isn't sure it's possible
typikolhas left
dwdGe0rG, Sure, there was no certainty the resulting PR would be accepted. But certainly unanimous agreement that we could in principle remove GC-1.0 support.
Ge0rGdwd: IIRC the minutes aren't clear and accurate in that regard, and that "silently cover up desyncs" was considered a desired feature.
debaclehas left
Ge0rGdwd: I'm pretty sure that everybody in Council can understand the implications of removing GC1 without seeing a PR.
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
Ge0rGBut yes, I owe us a PR.
KevThis is a thing I may regret asking, because it shows how asleep I am, but what happens if instead of removing gc1 joins, you treat any presence from someone not in the room as a 45 join?
dwdKev, Isn't that what GC-1.0 is?
KevWith full sync? I vaguely remember this was floated, but I don't remember the discussion.
ZashKev: You may proceed with regretting
Ge0rGKev: that is equivalent to gc1
Kevdwd: Not quite, you don't get the MUC payloads, do you?
ZashKev: Problem is that you don't know that it was a full sync until the last few stanzas of the sync.
dwdKev, I think you do, don't you? We assume a GC-1.0 client will ignore it.
dwdKev, The only difference is that room creation via GC-1.0 doesn't lock.
KevAh, that was the problem, was it? Not knowing from the first stanza that it's treated as a join?
ZashOr, do you even know? It might be ambigous.
ZashHence "it'd be nice if there was a state reset signal"
Ge0rGZash: the self-presence _might_ give that away.
dwdGe0rG, In any case, COuncil probably can understand the implications in principle of removing GC-1.0 in principle, yes. But Council has to vote on any PR, anyway.
KevIt's a clue, but not proof.
KevIt can certainly go wrong, where MSN is concerned.
ZashGe0rG: I'm not so sure. Does it say "you joined" or "this is a presence from you"?
Ge0rGZash: yes
KevAt least as long as the codes aren't used consistently.
ZashGe0rG: Ah, status code 210?
Ge0rGZash: no. you also get just a 110 on nick changes.
dwd(I'm happy to agree it's simpler to error a non-joining presence than try and guess if the response is a sync or not)
Ge0rGhttps://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#changepres doesn't say whether to include 110 in presence update reflections
karoshihas left
Zash110 is "this is your presence"
210 is "service assigned you this nickname"
Ge0rGdwd: have you just gone through https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-October/033501.html ?
dwdGe0rG, No, because it's late and I'm going to bed.
KevNext question: What happens if you respond to a gc1 join with a kick?
KevI feel we've had that discussion too, and don't remember why that doesn't work.
dwdKev, Protocol or physical?
ZashKev: When joined or not joined?
KevA gc1 join when you're joined is just a status change.
Ge0rGKev: how is that different from an error presence?
KevAn error doesn't, on its own, say you're not in the room.
KevIt's far too late, and I'm too tired to think properly, but ISTM in my current state that sending a kick if you try to GC1 join would address the resync properties of gc1 from a different angle.
ZashMaybe
Kev(That is: ensure the user knows they're not in the room any more, so they can manually resync, even on old clients, and on new clients they can autorejoin)
Kev(Although you'd want to annotate the kick so a new client would know it's not a 'normal' kick and an autorejoin is ok)
Ge0rGKev: what's the GC1 syntax for kick?
KevI'm assuming, possibly wrongly, that the only 'use' these days for gc1 joins is the silent resync, not from gc1 clients.
Zash"""use"""
404.cityhas joined
ZashDo we really want silent resync?
Ge0rGKev: I agree with your assumption, if we don't imply a positive connotation to 'use'
KevThere's positives and negatives to it. I don't think it's entirely either.
KevWhereas the explicit kicks might be superior to both.
Ge0rG> Kev: what's the GC1 syntax for kick?
KevThere isn't one. That's what I was saying ,you'd use a 45 kick.
KevRight, bedtime.
dwdGe0rG, The assumption is that the only things sending GC-1.0 are resyncing '45 clients doing so by accident, and so they'd understand a '45 kick.
Ge0rGAh!
Ge0rGSo now we need a new status code or error condition for not-in-room.
ZashBut not an not-acceptable error?
Ge0rGZash: which means "you may not change your name" -- "what? Did I try to change my name? Maybe my MSN alter ego did!"
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
UsLhas left
Ge0rGZash: thank you, I've made good use of your PR #2
Ge0rGeverybody who hasn't gone to bed yet: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/787
XSF Discussion - 2019-04-17