Am I right to conclude that adding support for XEP-0157 as well as XEP-0232 on a server will result in more than one service discovery extension to be added to the disco#info response (which, according to https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0128.html#impl is "unlikely")?
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
kokonoehas left
dele2has joined
dele2has left
kokonoehas joined
Daniel
yes
Daniel
and i think i've seen clients do that
Daniel
because it triggered a bug in my caps calculation
Manassé Ngudiahas joined
Guus
(besides the point: what two extensions are added by clients? XEP-0157 seems applicable to servers only?)
Daniel
i was wondering that myself. but i don’t recall. that bug was fixed like 4 years ago or so
Zash
What 128 usages are there besides those two?
Guus
don't know. But these two now seem to bite the naive implementation in Openfire that defines that this shall not happen. 😃
alacerhas left
Zash
Hm, there's the http upload thing
Nekithas left
Zash
Altho also mostly for servers
Zash
Not that you couldn't do p2p http upload if you really wanted
Daniel
or yeah maybe it was prosody
Daniel
for when prosody does http upload on the server domain
Nekithas joined
Zash
In prosody it's handled through the same internal method (roughly named lists of items attached to the host, tracked per module), so it shouldn't have any problem with arbitrary number of forms. Should be no different from features.
Daniel
sure. i just meant maybe it was prosody (and not a client) that triggered the multi form bug caps calculation in Conversations
Guus
right, makes sense
Daniel
because with http upload and 157 you end up with two forms on the server domain
Guus
thanks!
Daniel
and servers have caps
dwdhas left
Guus
should the remark in https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0128.html#impl be modified?
Guus
seems less unlikely to happen.
Daniel
on one hand just remove that sentence seems reasonable on the other hand it's more than just editorial and we probably can’t do that to an active xep?
Daniel
but if we can i'd vote for removing it
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
jonas’
Could one of you draft a PR?
jonas’
then it can be discussed in this weeks council meeting
kokonoehas left
jonas’
I’d like to note that I find it curious that a XEP which defines wire format is only Informational :)
Zash
Perhaps it's actually defined in XEP-0030?
kokonoehas joined
Daniel
i mean the wire format is 0004
Zash
Hm, no mention
Daniel
and 128 is probably meant as. 'here is an idea why not use 0004'
Zash
Why not put 0004 everywhere!!!
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
alameyohas left
pdurbinhas joined
jonas’
rebase all of XMPP on top of 0004!!k
Zash
0004 in pubsub!
alameyohas joined
dwdhas joined
jcbrandhas left
pdurbinhas left
jcbrandhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
Guus
jonas’ https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/797
jonas’
Guus, \o/
Alexhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
Alexhas joined
alameyohas left
waqashas left
alacerhas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
alacerhas left
matlaghas left
alameyohas joined
COM8has joined
COM8has left
matlaghas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
rtq3has left
j.rhas joined
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
alameyohas left
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
Daniel
is PAM still a thing?
j.rhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
rtq3has joined
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
Zash
Sorta needed by MIX, no?
Daniel
mhhh i was thinking about regular PAM not MIX-PAM
Daniel
"In future, this specification MAY be incorporated into Pubsub Account Management (XEP-0376) [4] (PAM) which follows a similar model. " <- maybe we should make that decision before we roll out mix
Daniel
and not in a future after mix was deployed
flow
> Zash> Sorta needed by MIX, no?
unfortunately not
Zash
Because we concluded that you could do presence based MIX?
kokonoehas left
Nekithas left
kokonoehas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
Nekithas joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
j.rhas joined
krauqhas left
krauqhas joined
lumihas left
rtq3has left
APachhas left
matlaghas left
matlaghas joined
mimi89999has left
Manassé Ngudiahas left
Manassé Ngudiahas joined
mimi89999has joined
alameyohas joined
j.rhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
Manassé Ngudiahas left
alameyohas left
Manassé Ngudiahas joined
lnjhas left
lnjhas joined
flow
no MIX does simply not re-use xep376 semantics
flow
or, it does re-use the semantics but not the protocol
Daniel
Imho it would be kinda neat if it did. Because then we would get regular pam for free and can use that in other places as well
alameyohas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
sezuanhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
kokonoehas left
kokonoehas joined
lnjhas left
alameyohas left
lnjhas joined
lovetoxhas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
Manassé Ngudiahas left
alameyohas joined
jcbrandhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
vanitasvitae
Hehe, funny that XEP-0392: Consistent Color Generation already exists in two incompatible versions :D
So it doesn't exist in two incompatible versions, it exists in HSLuv, no? :)
pep.
(I know dino uses a slightly different one, but they're similar enough that jonas was going to add it to the XEP iirc)
pep.
http://www.hsluv.org/comparison/ I think dino uses HPLuv
rtq3has joined
vanitasvitae
If I'm not mistaken, version 0.4.0 produces different results than 0.6.0 does
pep.
vanitasvitae, I guess the point is to use the latest version :)
vanitasvitae
Yeah but still :D
pep.
Things evolve
Zash
That's what happens to Experimental XEPs
pep.
To anything! To Life!
pep.
It also happens for Final XEPs, just not in a direct way. A new XEP gets created and people are encouraged to move to it, and after a few years this new XEP is now the "modern" way of doing it
pep.
Stability is an illusion
Zash
Is this turning into a Debian rant? 😛
vanitasvitae
To be clear, I just find it funny :D
pep.
I wasn't going to mention it :p
pep.
Zash, though, Debian's definition of stable is different
lumihas joined
Daniel
i should probably give hpl a try for Conversations as well
alameyohas joined
alameyohas left
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
rtq3has left
rtq3has joined
COM8has joined
COM8has left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
waqashas joined
jonas’
vanitasvitae, there’s a reason I haven’t asked for a Last Call yet ;)
APachhas joined
alameyohas joined
vanitasvitae
jonas’: can the authors decide for themselves when to issue the last call?
pep.
The author has control over the experimental XEP and decide when to LC yes
Daniel
They can ask council
APachhas left
vanitasvitae
Ah ok
Nekithas left
debaclehas left
jonas’
anyone can ask Council
valohas left
jonas’
vanitasvitae, and you probably didn’t even spot the subtle differences for MUCs betwene the versions ;)