XSF Discussion - 2019-11-03

  1. mimi89999 has left
  2. mimi89999 has joined
  3. remko has left
  4. mimi89999 has left
  5. mimi89999 has joined
  6. karoshi has left
  7. krauq has left
  8. krauq has joined
  9. debacle has joined
  10. mimi89999 has left
  11. Mikaela has left
  12. mimi89999 has joined
  13. mimi89999 has left
  14. mimi89999 has joined
  15. david has left
  16. jubalh has joined
  17. david has joined
  18. Daniel has left
  19. jubalh has left
  20. mathijs has left
  21. mathijs has joined
  22. mimi89999 has left
  23. mimi89999 has joined
  24. mimi89999 has left
  25. mimi89999 has joined
  26. mimi89999 has left
  27. mimi89999 has joined
  28. Daniel has joined
  29. Tobias has left
  30. lskdjf has left
  31. pdurbin has joined
  32. Chobbes has joined
  33. xalek has joined
  34. pdurbin has left
  35. debacle has left
  36. xalek has left
  37. xalek has joined
  38. remko has joined
  39. mukt2 has left
  40. adiaholic has left
  41. adiaholic has joined
  42. mukt2 has joined
  43. andy has left
  44. Chobbes has left
  45. Chobbes has joined
  46. j.r has left
  47. Chobbes has left
  48. mukt2 has left
  49. pdurbin has joined
  50. neshtaxmpp has left
  51. neshtaxmpp has joined
  52. andrey.g has joined
  53. andrey.g has left
  54. andrey.g has joined
  55. emus has left
  56. Douglas Terabyte has left
  57. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  58. mathijs has left
  59. Daniel has left
  60. mathijs has joined
  61. remko has left
  62. Daniel has joined
  63. mathijs has left
  64. mathijs has joined
  65. mathijs has left
  66. mathijs has joined
  67. remko has joined
  68. mukt2 has joined
  69. pdurbin has left
  70. mathijs has left
  71. mathijs has joined
  72. mathijs has left
  73. mathijs has joined
  74. debxwoody has left
  75. mukt2 has left
  76. debxwoody has joined
  77. mukt2 has joined
  78. Daniel has left
  79. Daniel has joined
  80. waqas has joined
  81. adiaholic has left
  82. krauq has left
  83. Douglas Terabyte has left
  84. winfried has left
  85. winfried has joined
  86. adiaholic has joined
  87. winfried has left
  88. winfried has joined
  89. winfried has left
  90. winfried has joined
  91. mimi89999 has left
  92. mimi89999 has joined
  93. aj has left
  94. Shell has left
  95. Shell has joined
  96. Shell has left
  97. Shell has joined
  98. Shell has left
  99. Shell has joined
  100. mukt2 has left
  101. lskdjf has joined
  102. APach has joined
  103. wurstsalat has left
  104. winfried has left
  105. winfried has joined
  106. winfried has left
  107. winfried has joined
  108. pdurbin has joined
  109. lskdjf has left
  110. adiaholic has left
  111. debxwoody has left
  112. mukt2 has joined
  113. xalek has left
  114. pdurbin has left
  115. mukt2 has left
  116. adiaholic has joined
  117. mukt2 has joined
  118. mukt2 has left
  119. remko has left
  120. remko has joined
  121. rion has left
  122. debxwoody has joined
  123. rion has joined
  124. mukt2 has joined
  125. remko has left
  126. remko has joined
  127. debxwoody has left
  128. debxwoody has joined
  129. remko has left
  130. remko has joined
  131. remko has left
  132. remko has joined
  133. jubalh has joined
  134. Tobias has joined
  135. mukt2 has left
  136. mukt2 has joined
  137. Daniel has left
  138. remko has left
  139. Daniel has joined
  140. andy has joined
  141. jubalh has left
  142. pdurbin has joined
  143. remko has joined
  144. winfried has left
  145. winfried has joined
  146. adiaholic has left
  147. adiaholic has joined
  148. rion has left
  149. karoshi has joined
  150. mathijs has left
  151. mathijs has joined
  152. Nekit has left
  153. mathijs has left
  154. mathijs has joined
  155. pdurbin has left
  156. aj has joined
  157. winfried has left
  158. winfried has joined
  159. lovetox has joined
  160. winfried has left
  161. winfried has joined
  162. wurstsalat has joined
  163. mimi89999 has left
  164. winfried has left
  165. winfried has joined
  166. winfried has left
  167. winfried has joined
  168. winfried has left
  169. winfried has joined
  170. emus has joined
  171. winfried has left
  172. winfried has joined
  173. mukt2 has left
  174. waqas has left
  175. Mikaela has joined
  176. mimi89999 has joined
  177. mukt2 has joined
  178. mukt2 has left
  179. alameyo has left
  180. alameyo has joined
  181. debacle has joined
  182. mukt2 has joined
  183. alameyo has left
  184. winfried has left
  185. winfried has joined
  186. !XSF_Martin has left
  187. alameyo has joined
  188. winfried has left
  189. winfried has joined
  190. marc_ has joined
  191. winfried has left
  192. winfried has joined
  193. !XSF_Martin has joined
  194. debacle has left
  195. debacle has joined
  196. winfried has left
  197. winfried has joined
  198. mukt2 has left
  199. dwd has joined
  200. mukt2 has joined
  201. j.r has joined
  202. kokonoe has left
  203. kokonoe has joined
  204. alameyo has left
  205. alameyo has joined
  206. lskdjf has joined
  207. adiaholic has left
  208. marc_ has left
  209. mukt2 has left
  210. marc_ has joined
  211. jubalh has joined
  212. winfried has left
  213. winfried has joined
  214. winfried has left
  215. winfried has joined
  216. pdurbin has joined
  217. !XSF_Martin has left
  218. debacle has left
  219. debacle has joined
  220. !XSF_Martin has joined
  221. debacle has left
  222. debacle has joined
  223. mukt2 has joined
  224. debacle has left
  225. debacle has joined
  226. adiaholic has joined
  227. debacle has left
  228. debacle has joined
  229. pdurbin has left
  230. debacle has left
  231. debacle has joined
  232. adiaholic has left
  233. mukt2 has left
  234. adiaholic has joined
  235. LNJ has joined
  236. Shell has left
  237. LNJ has left
  238. LNJ has joined
  239. mathijs has left
  240. mathijs has joined
  241. mathijs has left
  242. mathijs has joined
  243. mathijs has left
  244. mathijs has joined
  245. mukt2 has joined
  246. mathijs has left
  247. mathijs has joined
  248. mukt2 has left
  249. adiaholic has left
  250. winfried has left
  251. winfried has joined
  252. jubalh has left
  253. jubalh has joined
  254. mukt2 has joined
  255. winfried has left
  256. winfried has joined
  257. adiaholic has joined
  258. mathijs has left
  259. mathijs has joined
  260. Chobbes has joined
  261. mukt2 has left
  262. dwd has left
  263. dwd has joined
  264. Chobbes has left
  265. winfried has left
  266. winfried has joined
  267. Chobbes has joined
  268. marc_ has left
  269. marc_ has joined
  270. winfried has left
  271. winfried has joined
  272. winfried has left
  273. winfried has joined
  274. mathijs has left
  275. mathijs has joined
  276. winfried has left
  277. winfried has joined
  278. j.r has left
  279. dwd has left
  280. dwd has joined
  281. matlag has left
  282. winfried has left
  283. winfried has joined
  284. mathijs has left
  285. mathijs has joined
  286. j.r has joined
  287. matlag has joined
  288. winfried has left
  289. winfried has joined
  290. mukt2 has joined
  291. Chobbes has left
  292. kokonoe has left
  293. mukt2 has left
  294. pdurbin has joined
  295. adiaholic has left
  296. Guus has left
  297. Guus has joined
  298. Chobbes has joined
  299. winfried has left
  300. winfried has joined
  301. winfried has left
  302. kokonoe has joined
  303. winfried has joined
  304. winfried has left
  305. winfried has joined
  306. winfried has left
  307. winfried has joined
  308. pdurbin has left
  309. winfried has left
  310. winfried has joined
  311. goffi has joined
  312. Chobbes has left
  313. Chobbes has joined
  314. winfried has left
  315. winfried has joined
  316. Link Mauve Why is SXE based on message instead of iq?
  317. Link Mauve Also, why is it entirely ad-hoc instead of reusing e.g. MUC or PubSub primitives?
  318. Zash Why not?
  319. Link Mauve Zash, because the semantics very much match iqs.
  320. pep. SXE?
  321. Link Mauve XEP-0284.
  322. pep. k
  323. Chobbes has left
  324. winfried has left
  325. winfried has joined
  326. Link Mauve Also, why is there both a Jingle initialisation and another initialisation based on messages afterward?
  327. larma Link Mauve, I guess so that you don't have to ack state changes? Not that I like it, but it could have been the motivation. And also doesn't apply to the initial state offer which really is exactly iq semantics.
  328. winfried has left
  329. larma Because someone said: "You should use Jingle for that"? 😀
  330. Link Mauve Most likely; I’ll have to go and read the council minutes from back then.
  331. Shell has joined
  332. larma Seems it was only added in 0.0.8, but there is no history from before 2010 in git 🙁
  333. winfried has joined
  334. winfried has left
  335. winfried has joined
  336. Link Mauve virtual void send( const std::string& message, const std::string& subject, const StanzaExtensionList& sel = StanzaExtensionList() );
  337. Link Mauve And what if I want to send a message without a body and a subject…?
  338. mathijs has left
  339. mathijs has joined
  340. jonas’ "", ""
  341. jonas’ \o/
  342. Link Mauve /o\
  343. jonas’ std::optional?
  344. Link Mauve This is an API I probably can’t modify.
  345. jonas’ pity
  346. Link Mauve I could add a new one I guess.
  347. Link Mauve Still not sure why I’m doing this in C++ and not in Rust.
  348. jonas’ because C++ is more awesome than this newfangled mess of "systems programming" languages :)
  349. kokonoe has left
  350. Link Mauve I’m not doing systems programming though, just adding collaborativeness to a text editor.
  351. Zash Link Mauve: Aaaah, CW those C++ lines plz!!!! NSFMybrain
  352. Link Mauve Sorry, XEP-0382 still isn’t implemented in my client.
  353. larma Link Mauve, how is your council candidacy going? Not sure which timezone we are using for the deadline, but it's something like today...
  354. Link Mauve Some timezone. :)
  355. Link Mauve I’ll start working on it once I give up on this C++.
  356. mukt2 has joined
  357. larma You can not become a candidate after the election 😉
  358. Link Mauve I know that!
  359. winfried has left
  360. winfried has joined
  361. dwd has left
  362. dwd has joined
  363. debacle has left
  364. adiaholic has joined
  365. mathijs has left
  366. mathijs has joined
  367. mukt2 has left
  368. adiaholic has left
  369. adiaholic has joined
  370. winfried has left
  371. winfried has joined
  372. mukt2 has joined
  373. winfried has left
  374. winfried has joined
  375. mathijs has left
  376. mathijs has joined
  377. Ge0rG Link Mauve: just give up on it. I never thought I'd say that, but: RIIR!
  378. Zash RIIC
  379. Zash +Lua
  380. winfried has left
  381. winfried has joined
  382. jonas’ we already have >5 candidates. I am amazed
  383. jonas’ and two new ones at that
  384. Link Mauve Ge0rG, I wonder if Swiften might not be better than gloox.
  385. Link Mauve But I’ll definitely have to fix the SXE spec too.
  386. Zash Link Mauve: Existing thing already using gloox?
  387. Link Mauve No, it isn’t collaborative yet.
  388. jonas’ larma, from your application > That said, my criteria for accepting a XEP as experimental would be: […]
  389. jonas’ I think this misses an important part (which is even mentioned in XEP-0001 IIRC): "It should not duplicate existing protocols."
  390. jonas’ although that might be implicit in "It should solve a problem."
  391. larma Yeah, I think it's implicit in there. A duplicate doesn't solve any problems
  392. jonas’ fair enough
  393. jonas’ in any case, thanks for running
  394. winfried has left
  395. winfried has joined
  396. Zash jonas’: How do you replace / improve on existing things without duplication?
  397. Zash Does XEP-0313 not duplicate some subset of XEP-0136?
  398. winfried has left
  399. winfried has joined
  400. kokonoe has joined
  401. winfried has left
  402. winfried has joined
  403. pep. Ge0rG, https://i.imgur.com/10k62WA.png RIIR!
  404. pep. larma, ^
  405. Zash RIIR https://www.r-project.org/
  406. pep. :D
  407. marc_ has left
  408. marc_ has joined
  409. Mikaela has left
  410. Mikaela has joined
  411. Chobbes has joined
  412. winfried has left
  413. winfried has joined
  414. rion has joined
  415. larma pep., I will consider it for version 2.0 😉
  416. pep. hahaha
  417. mathijs has left
  418. mathijs has joined
  419. winfried has left
  420. winfried has joined
  421. jonas’ larma, re your council election again and since you have an interesting view about personal opinions: One thing which has repeatedly come up is the debate between amending existing standards vs. creating new documents to add features (specifically around XEP-0045 and XEP-0060). Do you think this is a matter of opinion or "taste"? If not, what is the objectively correct way? If it is, how would voting on this question work with your goal to avoid personal preferences?
  422. jubalh has left
  423. jubalh has joined
  424. mukt2 has left
  425. winfried has left
  426. winfried has joined
  427. pep. jonas’, tbh, I don't care which, but I want things to move
  428. pep. I think it's similar for larma(?)
  429. Nekit has joined
  430. larma jonas’, I just put something related to that topic on my candidacy page. 1. I think both 45 and 60 should probably be Final already. Most of the changes actually applied to them could be done to Final XEPs as well. 2. Many of the changes proposed to 45 and 60 could also be standalone XEPs. 3. Even if things are not properly defined, it can be later clarified that they are not part of that specification and (even opposing) proposals can then be made in new XEPs (for example IQ routing in 45).
  431. pep. To me it's exactly the same if somebody modifies a XEP or recreates a new XEP amending the first one. it's just the form. We as a group could settle on sth if necessary
  432. jonas’ larma, thanks
  433. larma pep., yes and no: the rules how things are advanced to Draft should also apply to significant changes and that won't be possible without a new XEP.
  434. Daniel has left
  435. jonas’ larma, I think you make a very good point in that
  436. Daniel has joined
  437. pep. larma, but in the end, you add a new disco feature anyway
  438. jonas’ and at that point it’s questionable whether namespace bumps should be needed at all anymore... but that’s a bigger topic, too big for me right now (-> afk)
  439. larma I would like to get rid of "namespace bumps" and introduce "new namespaces" in new XEPs (which might just look like a namespace bump, i.e. can have only a version number added/increased)
  440. pep. "which might just look like a namespace bump", it's exactly the same to me indeed. and I'm fine with both, as long as things move
  441. adiaholic has left
  442. adiaholic has joined
  443. Zash Huh?
  444. pep. ?
  445. Zash Namespaced mini-extension protocols without breaking everything using the previous version/namespace?
  446. winfried has left
  447. winfried has joined
  448. pdurbin has joined
  449. winfried has left
  450. winfried has joined
  451. pep. "without breaking everything using the previous version/namespace", we're not magicians
  452. Zash Something something like semantic versioning? You can to some extent add new stuff without replacing the namespace.
  453. waqas has joined
  454. waqas has left
  455. waqas has joined
  456. pep. You mean "clarify"
  457. Zash No
  458. aj has left
  459. Zash I mean add new features
  460. Zash Something supporting the previous version won't know about those features, so no problem.
  461. pep. Yeah ok that's fine. I'm mostly talking about breaking stuff
  462. Zash I'm confused
  463. winfried has left
  464. winfried has joined
  465. winfried has left
  466. winfried has joined
  467. adiaholic has left
  468. adiaholic has joined
  469. Mikaela has left
  470. Mikaela has joined
  471. Mikaela has left
  472. larma Namespace bumps should in general be barely needed IMO. Most of it can be done using disco and just additional elements
  473. larma but of course it's so much easier to just break things and do a namespace bump
  474. Zash Sometimes
  475. larma Well it's easier for the XEP author, not easier for the developers 😉
  476. flow I don't think that you can make a specific statement, it really depends on the specific case.
  477. flow err "generic statement"
  478. larma True.
  479. larma I am also not against new namespaces, I just feel they belong in a new XEP
  480. pdurbin has left
  481. flow A fresh experimental XEP only a few months old where are developers, and that includes implementing developers, are in the same groupchat is probably easier to namespace bump than a year old xep in draft state
  482. larma If it's easy to namespace bump, it's also easy to just not namespace bump. That's exactly the point
  483. flow so what's your stance on jingle ft then? should be collect improvements and bump it?
  484. larma flow, not sure what improvements are you talking about?
  485. larma IMO Jingle FT should be at least Draft already, so if there are significant changes required they should go in a new XEP
  486. flow I wouldn't be suprised to find some if I am going to implement it.
  487. Zash Maybe what we should do is bump the namespace of Experimental XEPs even more often, so everyone either gets used to it or gets together and makes it Draft?
  488. flow larma, so what is the advantage if having a new XEP versus a major overhaul of the existing? (note that i have no strong opinion in that direction, just wanting to hear the rationale behind it)
  489. winfried has left
  490. winfried has joined
  491. Shell has left
  492. Shell has joined
  493. larma Zash, would actually be fine as well. Point is: Experimental XEPs should be deployed in wild, so any changes (if they bump namespace or not) shouldn't have any influence on any running systems.
  494. flow I'm not opposed to having Jingle-FT-2, but it doesn't feel like the question if we should new-xep or bump-the-existing-xep is something that tackles our most important issues
  495. rion Jingle-ft is fine as for me. Maybe separate XEPs may describe various meta information for it. Like it was done with thumbnails. Jingle-s5b needs fixes
  496. larma flow, If it's a new protocol it should get a new XEP number so we have a proper name/identifier for the protocol.
  497. Zash Jingle FT Base and a File Metadata XEP?
  498. larma "My server supports archives." "Which version?" "XEP-0313" isn't really helpful
  499. Zash larma, "XEP-0313 v0.6" tho?
  500. Zash == `urn:xmpp:mam:2`
  501. goffi has left
  502. goffi has joined
  503. larma So we don't define protocols in XEPs anymore but in XEP versions?
  504. larma and a different version could be a completely different protocol?
  505. Zash That's how it is now
  506. larma Only for very few XEPs, and I consider this an issue.
  507. winfried has left
  508. winfried has joined
  509. Ge0rG So we should define protocols by namespaces instead?
  510. Zash Don't we already, in a way?
  511. winfried has left
  512. winfried has joined
  513. Ge0rG On the wire, but not in the documentation.
  514. flow larma> flow, not sure what improvements are you talking about? That is actually a nice example for one of the major issues we have. We are incredibly bad at collecting and organizing protocol feedback, leave allone incooperating it into a new protocol revision
  515. Ge0rG Speaking of which, do I need to rewrite CS-2020 now in terms of feature namespaces? Which version of MAM should it require? From clients? From servers?
  516. Zash This seems like pain that comes naturally from having protocols under development be implemented and deployed in the wild.
  517. larma We don't always change namespace for protocol changes of Experimental XEPs
  518. flow Ge0rG, "From Client? From servers"? What is the issue if the compliance suites that state xep313 (and that implies the current state of xep313)?
  519. rion Ah yes. Jingle-ft needs some clarification how to properly finish file transfer. For example when we have multiple files in one session. Or when final checksum isn't sent
  520. larma Probably nobody would care to bump the references namespace if 372 is changes...
  521. kokonoe has left
  522. flow larma, I think there is a sensible policy that protocol changes that break interoperability require a namespace bump in place
  523. Ge0rG larma: normally we do bump, except under very closely defined conditions.
  524. winfried has left
  525. winfried has joined
  526. Zash > that break interoperability This!
  527. Ge0rG flow: that it's not clear at which moment of time that version is pinned. On January 1st?
  528. flow Ge0rG, who said something about pinning the version? :)
  529. larma Ge0rG, I had the feeling we bump if it would break interoperability of live deployments. As per XEP-0001 there shouldn't be live deployments of Experimental XEPs so there shouldn't be namespace bumps. Draft XEPs should and Final XEPs must not break interoperability, so no chance of a namespace bump there.
  530. Ge0rG We _normally_ don't bump if it doesn't affect interoperability, but this is not what larma was asking about?
  531. Ge0rG flow: you implied that. Otherwise, what happens if a namespace is bumped during the CS year?
  532. flow Ge0rG, larma wrote about "protocol changes". we obviously don't bump for every protocol change
  533. larma The problem is that we fail to move XEPs to Draft fast enough so that everybody started considering Experimental or even Deferred XEPs as if they were Draft
  534. Zash larma, isn't that the root problem? Experimental deployed in the wild?
  535. Zash LC all the XEPs!
  536. flow Ge0rG, then the compliance suite refers to the current state of the xep
  537. Ge0rG flow: so you say the CS defines a moving target?
  538. Zash Should the compliance suite even be allowed to reference Experimental XEPs outside the "future stuff" section?
  539. flow Zash, or, maybe even better, make XEPs IETF style immutable
  540. Ge0rG Zash: should we have a process in place that moves Experimental XEPs forward when they are needed?
  541. Zash flow, I kinda like that, but not enough to rewrite XEP-0001 for it
  542. flow Ge0rG, XEPs are, to some degree, always a moving target
  543. larma Ge0rG, IMO CS shouldn't be able to point to Experimental XEPs so that it cannot point to a moving target
  544. larma *highly moving target
  545. flow And I don't see the point in pinning XEPs to particular namespace in the compliance suites
  546. Ge0rG larma: that would stall XEP progress even more
  547. flow What Ge0rG said
  548. larma Why?
  549. emus has left
  550. flow I have the feeling because XEPs have a hard time transitioning from 'experimental' to 'draft'
  551. Ge0rG larma: developers have hardly the time to implement one version of the most relevant XEPs. How are they supposed to implement multiple versions?
  552. larma Why should they be required to implement multiple versions just because we move experimental to draft?
  553. Ge0rG Can we please focus on realistic ideas, given the overall xsf time budget?
  554. kokonoe has joined
  555. Zash Plz no
  556. flow Ge0rG, I too, fail to see where the "multiple versions" now comes from
  557. Zash flow, ns bump transitions?
  558. flow Zash, yes, but why do developers have to implement multiple namespaces if the compliance suites are not allowed to point to experimental XEPs?
  559. Ge0rG If we have one version in the CS and then the XEP is bumped, nobody will implement the new one.
  560. Ge0rG Speaking of time budget, I'm out.
  561. adiaholic has left
  562. Chobbes has left
  563. adiaholic has joined
  564. Chobbes has joined
  565. larma Ge0rG, You mean if there is one version in CS and there is a new Experimental XEP replacing it, it's not going to be widely implemented? Yes that's the whole idea of Experimental XEPs. As soon as it becomes Draft, the (next) CS can point to the new version. No need to implement two versions at the same time.
  566. Chobbes has left
  567. Ge0rG larma: and then next year everybody already has implemented the changes, disables the old version and enables the new one at midnight, January 1st?😉
  568. Zash Flag days?
  569. larma Ge0rG, well transitions are certainly a problem when breaking backwards compatibility, but that isn't any difference to the current situation. I do agree we should try to not namespace bump as long as possible, a new XEP doesn't imply a new namespace as it can also build on top of an existing XEP.
  570. dwd has left
  571. dwd has joined
  572. Ge0rG larma: just because you call it "new XEP" it doesn't automatically give people the time to implement it and maintain it aside to the old one
  573. Ge0rG Reality is, some developers will keep multiple versions in parallel, sometimes in different modules with different feature sets. Other will just bump in the least uncomfortable version release
  574. Ge0rG That would break CS compatibility with pinned namespaces
  575. larma I don't see the point you want to make here
  576. pep. “Zash> isn't that the root problem? Experimental deployed in the wild?” not put like this but yes. The problem is that we live stuff lingering as experimental. So yes, LC more things
  577. Ge0rG People wouldn't adopt new versions, meaning that the CS won't be updated in a meaningful way
  578. pep. “Zash> I kinda like that, but not enough to rewrite XEP-0001 for it“, what's wrong about rewriting 0001?
  579. Zash pep., thanks for volonteering
  580. pep. People are afraid of change and that's the one thing I want to stop, it's quite annoying
  581. pep. Zash, I'm sure I'm not alone
  582. pep. And can we stop this "blame game", or pushing stuff onto each other game
  583. pep. I'm sure we can manage to do stuff collectively and not just as one person at a time
  584. pep. Yes we're all volonteers, so what
  585. Zash Welcome to volonteer based organizations.
  586. Zash Getting volonteers to do things is Hard.
  587. pep. I believe we can do better than pushing stuff onto each other because
  588. larma Ge0rG, The CS isn't supposed to be "This is what everyone else implements" but "This is what everyone should implement". Thus you can update the CS to the new version even without everyone implementing if you think it should be. You can also say something "you are still CS compliant this year if you implement the old standard, but next year we will probably require the new one". However I wouldn't call a client or server Advanced CS2020 compliant that only implements mam:tmp, it should probably be at least mam:1
  589. winfried has left
  590. winfried has joined
  591. mathijs has left
  592. mathijs has joined
  593. larma "This is what everyone should implement" -> "This is what Council suggests everyone should implement"
  594. mathijs has left
  595. mathijs has joined
  596. winfried has left
  597. winfried has joined
  598. larma Zash, "Getting volonteers to do things is Hard." especially if they ask to help and receive the answer "it's none of your business"
  599. larma (not meaning you)
  600. Zash Is that something someone said here?
  601. larma It did happen in the past yes.
  602. mathijs has left
  603. mathijs has joined
  604. Zash pep., FWIW, nothing wrong with rewriting XEP 0001, just not a current priority for me.
  605. pep. Zash, what I meant by that is, if we have to rewrite 0001, then so be it. I won't be afraid of it
  606. pep. I'm annoyed by the "thou shalt not change XEP-xxxx" and all the fearmongering around changing things
  607. winfried has left
  608. winfried has joined
  609. winfried has left
  610. winfried has joined
  611. pep. We cannot go ahead without changing things. XMPP would be dead already if it were not possible to do so. (Some still say it still is, but that's an opinion I'm happy to discard. Lots of changes happened in the previous years and change will come again)
  612. mathijs has left
  613. Ge0rG pep.: people even dared to change 0045
  614. Zash pep., just do it!
  615. Kev Somewhere in the previous 300 messages someone mentioned me. If it's important, drop me a mail please.
  616. mathijs has joined
  617. Shell XMPP honestly feels like it's been reviving - especially with omemo being supported by more things now.
  618. pep. I wouldn't especially name OMEMO, but ok :)
  619. Chobbes has joined
  620. pep. That definitely played in the acceptance by users
  621. Shell it's what got my circle using it instead of things like Signal, at least - encrypted group chats combined with being able to pick a client according to individual preferences is a big deal.
  622. winfried has left
  623. winfried has joined
  624. pep. I'd like to avoid security discussions right now when we're talking about process
  625. Shell sorry!
  626. pep. (Not that I want to prevent you from talking about this, just that this topic is a minefield, and we're already discussing another)
  627. winfried has left
  628. winfried has joined
  629. pep. well, we were..
  630. mukt2 has joined
  631. Zash pep., so, where's your board|council application? 🙂
  632. pep. I'm procrastinating it. Give me a sec..
  633. mathijs has left
  634. mukt2 has left
  635. adiaholic has left
  636. adiaholic has joined
  637. marc_ has left
  638. marc_ has joined
  639. mathijs has joined
  640. xalek has joined
  641. debacle has joined
  642. waqas has left
  643. waqas has joined
  644. waqas has left
  645. waqas has joined
  646. waqas has left
  647. DebXWoody has joined
  648. mukt2 has joined
  649. winfried has left
  650. winfried has joined
  651. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  652. dwd has left
  653. dwd has joined
  654. winfried has left
  655. winfried has joined
  656. mukt2 has left
  657. winfried has left
  658. winfried has joined
  659. kokonoe has left
  660. kokonoe has joined
  661. mathijs has left
  662. mathijs has joined
  663. dwd has left
  664. matlag has left
  665. matlag has joined
  666. lskdjf has left
  667. lskdjf has joined
  668. winfried has left
  669. winfried has joined
  670. jubalh has left
  671. Chobbes has left
  672. Chobbes has joined
  673. Chobbes has left
  674. Zash Wait really? XEP-0081: Jabber MIME Type https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0081.xml
  675. Zash And https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3923#section-10
  676. Zash I was looking for this very thing the other day
  677. kokonoe has left
  678. Zash haha what
  679. Zash https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0104.xml
  680. kokonoe has joined
  681. UṣL has left
  682. kokonoe has left
  683. kokonoe has joined
  684. winfried has left
  685. winfried has joined
  686. mukt2 has joined
  687. pdurbin has joined
  688. mukt2 has left
  689. marc_ has left
  690. pdurbin has left
  691. Ge0rG This is shameful
  693. jonas’ there is the precedent I needed!!
  694. flow hmm the prefix in xep104 seems unnecessary
  695. flow just like the UTF-8 requirement in rfc3923 § 10
  696. flow but: yeah, using prefixes /o/ \o\ /o/
  697. Zash Oh no
  698. flow although I'd rather use them only when there is no alternative
  699. jonas’ they can be used to reduce traffic, but (in most cases) not in an RFC-compliant way.
  700. flow RFC-compliant way?
  701. zach has left
  702. zach has joined
  703. Zash RFC says something about avoiding prefixes?
  704. Zash https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#streams-ns-declarations sounds like a relevant heading
  705. Zash > It is conventional in the XMPP community for implementations to not generate namespace prefixes for elements that are qualified by extended namespaces https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#stanzas-extended
  706. Zash jonas’: so, we-dont-do-that-here.jpg
  707. Zash > Routing entities (typically servers) SHOULD try to maintain prefixes when serializing XML stanzas for processing, but receiving entities MUST NOT depend on the prefix strings to have any particular value E.g. Prosody will likely spit out such things as ns1:foo, ns2:bar etc
  708. flow Zash, does any of this talk about attributes?
  709. Zash Not directly from what I can see
  710. Zash Why wouldn't that be the same as for elements?
  711. emus has joined
  712. dwd has joined
  713. DebXWoody has left
  714. Chobbes has joined
  715. Shell has left
  716. winfried has left
  717. winfried has joined
  718. winfried has left
  719. winfried has joined
  720. Daniel has left
  721. Daniel has joined
  722. Daniel has left
  723. Daniel has joined
  724. dwd has left
  725. andrey.g has left
  726. Daniel has left
  727. Daniel has joined
  728. remko has left
  729. mukt2 has joined
  730. lovetox has left
  731. pdurbin has joined
  732. andrey.g has joined
  733. mukt2 has left
  734. pep. here we go
  735. pep. Link Mauve, your application.
  736. pdurbin has left
  737. Tobias has left
  738. rion has left
  739. rion has joined
  740. LNJ has left
  741. remko has joined
  742. Shell has joined
  743. remko has left
  744. adiaholic has left
  745. adiaholic has joined
  746. emus has left
  747. goffi has left
  748. xalek has left
  749. jubalh has joined
  750. Chobbes has left
  751. Chobbes has joined
  752. Chobbes has left
  753. Chobbes has joined
  754. remko has joined
  755. Chobbes has left
  756. Chobbes has joined
  757. karoshi has left
  758. jubalh has left
  759. mukt2 has joined
  760. Daniel has left
  761. pdurbin has joined
  762. waqas has joined
  763. remko has left
  764. mukt2 has left
  765. pdurbin has left