Dave, I got your one on one, but my reply isn't being delivered.
Dele (Mobile)has joined
Dele (Mobile)has left
evehas joined
debaclehas joined
dele2has joined
lnjhas left
evehas left
evehas joined
Ge0rG
This is an accurate depiction of why matrix wins over XMPP.
evehas left
evehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
Guus
Yes, this is bad, although I've never experienced it with anyone else than Dave
Guus
Which I suspect is running non-production code
jonas’
non-production s2s code
Guus
I'm guessing he's running s2s through Metre
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
UsLhas left
ralphm
👍
Ge0rG
I've experienced asymmetric s2s with other people than Dave.
ralphm
I'm sure Matrix is bug free. Let's just quit.
Ge0rG
Yes. Or let's maybe fix the reliability issues that we are mostly ignoring for two decades now.
fippo
we did s2s interop testing... a decade ago
ralphm
I've seen various proposals being discussed, here, on list, and at summits, but there's a whole lot of whataboutism and stuff, and not a lot of just experimenting. Dave's Metre is at least an attempt to figure out all the weird corners.
Ge0rG
fippo: this is not about protocol-level interop, but about network connectivity corner cases, or connections being stuck going unnoticed
Ge0rG
Things like the periodic pinger module of some widely-used server implementation which will _ping_ the other server, but won't act in any way on a timeout.
ralphm
I'm also not talking just about s2s, but good examples are MIX and SASL2.
Link Mauve
Ge0rG, there are still very few servers which support bidi, yours doesn’t for instance.
In the meantime you're not allowed to initiate bidi, you must only accept it :P
pep.
So that it gets displayed
adityaborikarhas left
Steve Killehas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
lumihas left
lumihas joined
Steve Killehas left
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
afrogeekhas left
afrogeekhas joined
remkohas joined
remkohas left
diguhas joined
Nekithas left
digu
dffdd
Mikaelahas left
stpeterhas joined
diguhas left
peterhas joined
Lancehas left
Mikaelahas joined
ralphm
Indeed
pdurbinhas joined
sonnyhas joined
davidhas left
pdurbinhas left
davidhas joined
Lancehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
eevvoorhas joined
sezuanhas left
krauqhas left
wojtekhas joined
andrey.ghas left
krauqhas joined
edhelashas left
jonas’
PSA: I got my MUA fixed apparently and I’ll take care of the editor backlog tomorrow afternoon or tonight.
Ge0rG
👍
edhelashas joined
patrickhas joined
sonnyhas left
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
adityaborikarhas left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
evehas left
evehas joined
COM8has joined
adityaborikarhas left
evehas left
evehas joined
COM8has left
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
alameyohas left
COM8has joined
Chobbeshas left
COM8has left
edhelas
small question regarding https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#subscriber-retrieve-requestrecent, when doing a max_items requests, the order should be most recent on top ?
Lance
in the example, it is newest at end of list
lskdjfhas left
debaclehas left
Yagizahas left
edhelas
to me it's an issue
edhelas
as a client I don't want to retrieve all the node items with their payloads (for performance purposes)
Lance
i can't find any text mandating a particular result ordering. but everything is shown as always oldest to newest
edhelas
so I retrieve only the item ids, then check which items are missing and then retrieve independently the items that I need
Lance
where max_items will just give you the page of results at the very end in that sort order
edhelas
yes but this order is not specified anywhere
edhelas
ejabberd actually returns the list the other way around