-
Link Mauve
“00:23:33 Zash> Wanna help with my WIP mod_nodeinfo2.lua?”, sure.
-
pep.
I also do fwiw
-
Link Mauve
Damn, XEP-0076 violates the RFC by adding a second payload to an iq, and not having any @type on it.
-
Link Mauve
This definitely needs fixing.
-
flow
Link Mauve, are you going to fix it?
-
Link Mauve
It would require a very different approach, which I’m not sure would fly.
-
Link Mauve
Such as using a namespaced attribute!!!
-
flow
Link Mauve, https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/842
-
Link Mauve
Thanks.
-
Link Mauve
But it means you have to add support for it in every single parser, rather than just once at the iq level.
-
Link Mauve
Imagine I forgot to implement it in the disco#info parser, I would fail to notice that your disco#info reply was evil.
-
Link Mauve
That in itself is a security issue.
-
flow
Would that be true for a namespaced attribute also?
-
flow
*Wouldn't that be
-
jonas’
Kev, while I have you on the hook, can you look at the docker hub thing? I didn’t have permissions to set up the builds myself.✎ -
jonas’
Kev, while I have you on the hook, did you have a chance to look at the docker hub thing? I didn’t have permissions to set up the builds myself. ✏
-
Kev
Oh, no, I didn't. I think that's you not having rights on github, as I've given you maximal rights on docker hub.
-
jonas’
Kev, I’m not sure about that
-
jonas’
also that web interface is extremely confusing
-
Kev
It is (confusing).
-
jonas’
Kev, I think I’d need permissions on the org, not on the docker repo on docker hub to do this
-
Kev
I think you need permission on the org, not the repo, on github to do this. I could be wrong.
-
Kev
Included in the right you've been granted on dockerhub is linking to github, unless I forget what I read.
-
jonas’
I’m pretty sure it’s on the docker hub side of things
-
jonas’
because it briefly shows me the org settings before deciding that I shouldn’t be able to use those
-
jonas’
this here is a 404 for me: https://cloud.docker.com/u/xmppxsf/settings/xmppxsf/dashboard
-
jonas’
and it wants me to go there to connect to github
-
Kev
It's a 404 for me too.
-
jonas’
m(
-
jonas’
maybe this is a glitch in the software then
-
jonas’
can *you* connect the repo to github?
-
jonas’
https://cloud.docker.com/u/xmppxsf/repository/docker/xmppxsf/registry/builds via this
-
Kev
Yes, but it requires me to grant access to assorted organisations that I don't want to, it seems, which is why I left it for someone else to do.
-
Kev
But it does indeed seem to be doing it through the org settings, you're right.
-
jonas’
so it’s GitHubs weird authz model again
-
Kev
Or what docker hub is asking for, possibly.
-
Kev
But it wants read/write access to the whole world.
-
jonas’
yeah, which it gets unless the GitHub org has prevented that by default >.>
-
jonas’
that’s GitHubs stupid model
-
Kev
https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/builds/#service-users-for-team-autobuilds says something about this, haven't read it yet.
-
Kev
jonas’: So I think what needs to happen is the XSF to have an appropriately-limited service account created on github, and then an org owner on dockerhub to link them.
-
Kev
I'd suggest Matt getting himself owner access to Docker Hub would be a better start to this than continuing with me having access and other iteam not.
-
jonas’
that sounds like a PITA
-
jonas’
why does it work for xeps etc.?
-
Kev
I assume it was configured at some previous time when different access was needed.
-
Ge0rG
Daniel, jonas’: I want to add JFT to CS-2020. Should I also mandate SOCKS5, IBB, or both? I tend to have IBB only as a minimum consensus.
-
Daniel
ibb is a MUST in jingle ft iirc
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, yes, IBB
-
Zash
The last fallback.
-
jonas’
as minimum consensus
-
jonas’
advanced should probably support SOCKS5
-
Ge0rG
Daniel: ah, ok. Then it doesn't hurt to have it in CS2020.
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, I’d like to nominate Jingle Encryption for Future things✎ -
jonas’
Ge0rG, I’d like to nominate Jingle Encryption for Future Things✎ ✏ -
jonas’
Ge0rG, I’d like to nominate Jingle Encrypted Transport for Future Things ✏
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: if JFT is an advanced feature, is S5B advanced-advanced?
-
Daniel
i'd prefer to have http upload instead of jft
-
Ge0rG
Daniel: that'll be in Core IM
-
Zash
vcard4, deprecate vcard-temp?
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, good point, S5B should be honoruable mention, but don’t require it for advanced
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: there is no column for honorable mentions
-
Daniel
i hear cool use webrtc these days as transport
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, "Future Things"? ;)
-
Daniel
but i'm not cool
-
Ge0rG
I'm pondering whether to add 0066 in "File Upload"
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, I was thinking about that, too
-
Ge0rG
it's tribal knowledge, so better have it in there
-
jonas’
true
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: added all your feedback to #841
-
Daniel
Ge0rG: I'm sort of against bookmark conversion
-
Ge0rG
Daniel: mind discussing that on-list?
-
jonas’
yes please, I’m on my way out
-
Daniel
If our changes to bookmarks 2 are accepted by the authors I hope to be able to deprecate conversion soon
-
Ge0rG
I don't have a strong opinion on that, but it seemed useful to me.
-
Ge0rG
Daniel: what's the migration path from private XML and PEP to Bookmarks2?
-
Daniel
Ge0rG: bookmark 2 doing the conversion
-
Daniel
The xep already hints at that. Our changes add features for that
-
Ge0rG
> A server MAY choose to unify the bookmarks from both Private XML Storage (XEP-0049) [2] based and the current Bookmark Storage (XEP-0048) [1].
-
Ge0rG
it's a hint only.
-
Daniel
Ge0rG: yes
-
Daniel
For now
-
Ge0rG
Daniel: I will ask for an LC of CS2020 next week. Is the situation going to change until then?
-
Daniel
Probably not
-
Ge0rG
I need to redo 0411 anyway, because it is a server-thing.✎ -
Ge0rG
I need to move 0411 anyway, because it is a server-thing. ✏
-
Ge0rG
no wait. Everything is good.
-
pep.
jonas’, it might actually be interesting to split CCG and the use-cases? I mean CCG is currently defined on "a string", but 3.2 and 3.3 could be different XEPs? and more could be added this way
-
pep.
That's in reaction to Ge0rG's PR on 423, I find it pretty restrictive (not the right word) to name it the dep on 392 "User Name Coloring"✎ -
pep.
That's in reaction to Ge0rG's PR on 423, I find it pretty restrictive (not the right word) to name the dep on 392 "User Name Coloring" ✏
-
Ge0rG
pep.: do you have a better name suggestion?
-
pep.
I'd be happy to keep that name if we had a xep that requires CCG and is specifically for user name coloring :p
-
pep.
For CCG itself I'm not sure yeah
-
pep.
(And if it were split, it wouldn't make sense to include CCG itself anyway)
- Zash read "GCC"
-
jonas’
Zash, it’s even more confusing if you also are familiar with GGC, which is the Garbage Collector implementation GCC uses internally (while compiling)
-
Seve
@_@
-
Zash
The number of [GC]{3} is too damn high!
-
jonas’
I think there’s also a dithering algorithm or something like that which is in that space of names
-
Ge0rG
And, probably too obvious, the CCC.
-
jonas’
mildly amusing: I just found this (<https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/51948/is-it-okay-to-normalize-unicode-passwords-with-nfc-nfd>) stackexchange question I wrote five years ago. I love the sentence: > I found that there is a stringprep (RFC 3454) profile called SASLprep (RFC 4013) which is appearantly used for passwords and usernames in some protocols.