XSF Discussion - 2020-01-14

  1. sonny has joined
  2. !XSF_Martin has left
  3. paul has left
  4. wurstsalat has left
  5. goffi has left
  6. moparisthebest is members@ missing from https://xmpp.org/community/mailing-lists.html on purpose? there does appear to be public archives anyway https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/
  7. karoshi has left
  8. !XSF_Martin has joined
  9. andy has left
  10. Neustradamus moparisthebest: only for members
  11. Dele (Mobile) has left
  12. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  13. Dele (Mobile) has left
  14. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  15. mukt2 has joined
  16. mukt2 has left
  17. mukt2 has joined
  18. david has left
  19. Zash has left
  20. Dele (Mobile) has left
  21. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  22. Dele (Mobile) has left
  23. david has joined
  24. mukt2 has left
  25. mukt2 has joined
  26. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  27. stpeter has joined
  28. !XSF_Martin has left
  29. mukt2 has left
  30. david has left
  31. david has joined
  32. !XSF_Martin has joined
  33. Dele (Mobile) has left
  34. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  35. Dele (Mobile) has left
  36. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  37. stpeter The members@ archives are public.
  38. Dele (Mobile) has left
  39. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  40. neshtaxmpp has joined
  41. Shell has left
  42. Shell has joined
  43. neshtaxmpp has left
  44. neshtaxmpp has joined
  45. !XSF_Martin has left
  46. !XSF_Martin has joined
  47. pdurbin has joined
  48. adiaholic has joined
  49. mr.fister has left
  50. pdurbin has left
  51. stpeter has left
  52. larma has left
  53. larma has joined
  54. Douglas Terabyte has left
  55. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  56. Arc has left
  57. lskdjf has left
  58. adiaholic has left
  59. adiaholic has joined
  60. Nekit has joined
  61. matlag has left
  62. Vaulor has left
  63. Vaulor has joined
  64. andy has joined
  65. aj has joined
  66. !XSF_Martin has left
  67. !XSF_Martin has joined
  68. Yagiza has joined
  69. aj has left
  70. pdurbin has joined
  71. !XSF_Martin has left
  72. lorddavidiii has joined
  73. mimi89999 has left
  74. Tobias has joined
  75. matkor has left
  76. pdurbin has left
  77. adiaholic has left
  78. Daniel has left
  79. lovetox has joined
  80. Half-Shot has left
  81. rion has left
  82. Daniel has joined
  83. mimi89999 has joined
  84. Daniel has left
  85. wurstsalat has joined
  86. matkor has joined
  87. lovetox has left
  88. Daniel has joined
  89. lorddavidiii has left
  90. Daniel has left
  91. emus has joined
  92. lorddavidiii has joined
  93. adiaholic has joined
  94. paul has joined
  95. lovetox has joined
  96. matkor has left
  97. mimi89999 has left
  98. Daniel has joined
  99. Maranda has joined
  100. mimi89999 has joined
  101. jonas’ pep., agreed, members@ would also work for me
  102. lovetox has left
  103. mathijs has left
  104. mathijs has joined
  105. pdurbin has joined
  106. karoshi has joined
  107. Zash has joined
  108. Seve Hello pep. :D I've been on holidays and also sick, still recovering, I haven't been able to follow what's going on, will try to catch up on the following days after I get better
  109. pdurbin has left
  110. pep. Seve: ! :)
  111. mathijs has left
  112. mathijs has joined
  113. Seve Also my phone broke, so it is even harder to keep up to date... Sorry about this!
  114. Kev has joined
  115. lorddavidiii has left
  116. lorddavidiii has joined
  117. matkor has joined
  118. Yagiza has left
  119. Yagiza has joined
  120. adiaholic has left
  121. adiaholic has joined
  122. sonny has left
  123. sonny has joined
  124. Ge0rG has left
  125. Ge0rG has joined
  126. vanitasvitae has left
  127. vanitasvitae has joined
  128. dwd If you look very closely this is partly about XMPP: https://www.ncia.nato.int/NewsRoom/Pages/20191106-Connecting-the-Dots-The-High-North.aspx
  129. jonas’ of course not mentioning it with a single letter
  130. dwd Of course not. But it says "chat", which is NATO-ese for XMPP.
  131. jonas’ :D
  132. jonas’ over STANAG? :)
  133. dwd I can't tell. It mentions "wideband high-frequency", which would be STANAG 5066, though NATO are here talking about a common IP bearer, which means no XEP-0365.
  134. pep. XEP-0001 §1 "The XSF's standards process can be outlined informally as follows: [..] 2. [..] and agrees to transfer ownership over the protocol [..]", is "over" a typo here?
  135. pep. Should be "of"?
  136. dwd jonas’, Also "Over STANAG" is like saying "Over RFC". :-)
  137. dwd pep., No, "over" is fine. You can have "ownership over X".
  138. pep. ah ok
  139. pep. Maybe we should mandate Simple English in our specs :)
  140. Ge0rG > released a business opportunity for bidding that wording is very freaky
  141. Guus If you look very closely, you can find an XMPP reference on a whiteboard somewhere on these pictures: https://www.act.nato.int/cwix
  142. jonas’ dwd, sorry, I’m from a part of the amateur radio community, where STANAG generally refers to some HF thing the NATO uses for communications over radio, which I assume is STANAG 5066. TIL, thanks.
  143. jonas’ dwd, sorry, I’m from a part of the amateur radio community where STANAG generally refers to some HF thing the NATO uses for communications over radio, which I assume is STANAG 5066. TIL, thanks.
  144. dwd Ge0rG, Well, yes, NATO is terrifyingly bureaucratic. If you've done any government bidding, just imagine bidding for 28 governments simulataneously and you're about right.
  145. dwd jonas’, Ah, I vaguely knew there was some use of S'5066 in ham, but didn't realise it was quite that well known.
  146. Ge0rG dwd: yeah, that comes on top. But "to release a business opportunity" is just weird turbo capitalism speak
  147. dwd Ge0rG, Oh, yes. It's a little bubble.
  148. edhelas has left
  149. edhelas has joined
  150. mathijs has left
  151. mathijs has joined
  152. sonny has left
  153. sonny has joined
  154. winfried has left
  155. winfried has joined
  156. winfried has left
  157. winfried has joined
  158. mukt2 has joined
  159. mathijs has left
  160. mathijs has joined
  161. goffi has joined
  162. goffi has left
  163. goffi has joined
  164. pdurbin has joined
  165. sonny has left
  166. mukt2 has left
  167. mathijs has left
  168. jonas’ dwd, let’s say that was a rather specific corner
  169. mathijs has joined
  170. pdurbin has left
  171. sonny has joined
  172. mathijs has left
  173. mathijs has joined
  174. Wojtek has joined
  175. mathijs has left
  176. debacle has joined
  177. sonny has left
  178. j.r has left
  179. j.r has joined
  180. j.r has left
  181. j.r has joined
  182. winfried has left
  183. winfried has joined
  184. sonny has joined
  185. winfried has left
  186. winfried has joined
  187. winfried has left
  188. winfried has joined
  189. mathijs has joined
  190. winfried has left
  191. winfried has joined
  192. winfried has left
  193. winfried has joined
  194. pdurbin has joined
  195. mukt2 has joined
  196. mathijs has left
  197. mathijs has joined
  198. sonny has left
  199. Tao has joined
  200. sonny has joined
  201. winfried has left
  202. winfried has joined
  203. mathijs has left
  204. Tao has left
  205. mathijs has joined
  206. pdurbin has left
  207. intosi has left
  208. ralphm has left
  209. intosi has joined
  210. ralphm has joined
  211. dwd has left
  212. lorddavidiii has left
  213. matkor has left
  214. lorddavidiii has joined
  215. mukt2 has left
  216. dwd has joined
  217. sonny has left
  218. sonny has joined
  219. mukt2 has joined
  220. Wojtek has left
  221. winfried has left
  222. winfried has joined
  223. Wojtek has joined
  224. lskdjf has joined
  225. winfried has left
  226. winfried has joined
  227. mukt2 has left
  228. sonny has left
  229. sonny has joined
  230. Maranda has left
  231. Maranda has joined
  232. winfried has left
  233. winfried has joined
  234. winfried has left
  235. winfried has joined
  236. Tao has joined
  237. Tao has left
  238. Arc has joined
  239. winfried has left
  240. winfried has joined
  241. Tao has joined
  242. Shell has left
  243. Shell has joined
  244. Tao has left
  245. winfried has left
  246. winfried has joined
  247. Shell has left
  248. Shell has joined
  249. mukt2 has joined
  250. goffi has left
  251. pdurbin has joined
  252. paul has left
  253. winfried has left
  254. paul has joined
  255. winfried has joined
  256. winfried has left
  257. winfried has joined
  258. mukt2 has left
  259. Tao has joined
  260. Shell has left
  261. Shell has joined
  262. pdurbin has left
  263. Tao has left
  264. Shell has left
  265. Shell has joined
  266. emus has left
  267. emus has joined
  268. mathijs has left
  269. mathijs has joined
  270. mathijs has left
  271. mathijs has joined
  272. Shell has left
  273. Shell has joined
  274. mukt2 has joined
  275. stpeter has joined
  276. sonny has left
  277. Tao has joined
  278. stpeter has left
  279. Daniel has left
  280. Daniel has joined
  281. matlag has joined
  282. Guus Would it hurt to have some content served on the URLs that match the namespaces that are defined in our registrar, where applicable? I think I've just received a request to remove namespaces from Openfire, since the links are broken anyway. I'd prefer to not have the discussion that I'm going to have more often, in the future.
  283. Daniel has left
  284. Tao has left
  285. Daniel has joined
  286. Guus I'm wondering if any content that's being served without a HTTP error that's not a schema will break / confuse tooling.
  287. stpeter has joined
  288. Tao has joined
  289. mathijs has left
  290. pep. The discussion? That is "Please inform yourself about what a namespace is"?
  291. Ge0rG Guus: that sounds like another request to fix our registry
  292. pep. It's not about the registry from what I understand
  293. pep. It's about people not knowing that a namespace doesn't have to resolve
  294. pep. right(?)
  295. Guus Yes.
  296. Guus Basically: can we have non-error content at URLs like https://www.jabber.org/protocol/geoloc
  297. Daniel 14 year old me was slightly confused about the urls not resolving as well. But I don't think that making the urls resolve would have helped my understanding
  298. Daniel If anything it would have made it more confusing maybe
  299. Guus No, but it prevents me having awkward conversations with customers.
  300. Kev I suspect that them not resolving actually helps rather than hinders, in this case.
  301. Kev Because it forces understanding, rather than ploughing ahead on a basis of being ignorant about one's ignorance :)
  302. Guus maybe a redirect to https://xmpp.org/registrar/namespaces.html ?
  303. mukt2 has left
  304. Daniel > Because it forces understanding, rather than ploughing ahead on a basis of being ignorant about one's ignorance :) 👍
  305. Kev Guus: A redirect to namespaces might not be daft, though, yeah.
  306. flow Guus, I'd love to see namespaces of XEPs being URLs that point to the related version of the xep
  307. Kev flow: I see the appeal in that. I'm worried it would add confusion (see ignorant ignorance comment) from those not 'in the know'. But I'm certainly not high-F against the idea.
  308. sonny has joined
  309. MattJ I'm pretty sure they used to redirect (a very long time ago)
  310. Guus I'm not disagreeing with you all here - and there's something to be said for it, but I really don't want to fight this battle with everyone 🙂
  311. Tao has left
  312. Guus I'm looking for a path of least resistance here 🙂
  313. !XSF_Martin has joined
  314. Guus read: "Guus is chickening out"
  315. Guus "everyone" being the one customer that comes up with this in the past 5 years or so
  316. Guus (but for everyone that asks a question, 10 others wonder, but don't bother to ask)
  317. flow Kev, I do not follow the "ignorant ignorance" comment. Could you rephrase it for me? I don't see how namespace values pointing to the document declaring and defining that protocol used by those values can be anything but a big win
  318. Kev flow: If the URL doesn't point anywhere, people are forced to understand that the URL doesn't mean what people think it does. OTOH if we put URLs there for the http-based namespaces, are we going to have people thinking that they can shove the URL to random web pages in there? What about urn:xmpp stuff?
  319. Kev I don't feel strongly about it, but I suspect anything we do will lead to confusion by someone.
  320. pep. Guus, also note that this happens only for namespaces that happen to be http.
  321. Guus pep. I am painfully, painfully aware...
  322. pep. And hmm, the XSF has an http -> https redirection in place right
  323. flow Kev, I see, thanks
  324. dwd pep., See XEP-0419 §3.1 : https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0419.html#sect-idm46603442987040
  325. pep. contxt?
  326. pep. context?
  327. Holger Won't the uninformed think "oh the URL has died? (no wonder, Jabber is dying)" rather than "oh it points nowhere, must be just a namespace"?
  328. pep. ah, 419.
  329. Guus Context is: Ge0rG and dwd having fun.
  330. Kev Holger: Also possible.
  331. pep. dwd, yeah not what I'm saying.
  332. pep. Just saying confused customer gonna be confused
  333. Guus Still, serving a redirect to the registrar wouldn't be the worst idea?
  334. pep. The XSF doesn't have control over jabber.org though
  335. Guus it'd also have the benefit of what Flow proposes, although indirectly: a reference to the corresponding XEPs.
  336. Guus (without the downside that the URLs are added to documentation as Kev suggested, as they'd point to a generic landing page)
  337. Guus pep. I'm pretty sure we can approach the friendly sysops for jabber.org to make this change, if we want it.
  338. Kev I think Guus's suggestion is sound. The XSF doesn't have control over jabber.org, but this seems like something Peter isn't going to say 'no' to.
  339. pep. Guus, You mean just like we approached them to update their servers a while ago? :p
  340. Kev I suspect, anyway. I've been somewhat sidelined from recent jabber.org decisions.
  341. Guus pep. that's not helpful.
  342. pep. It is what it is
  343. Guus no-one here is very much opposed to this then?
  344. goffi has joined
  345. Kev I'm not.
  346. pep. I won't oppose that for sure. Not really in favor either
  347. Guus good enough for me 🙂
  348. Guus I'll poke some of the volunteers at jabber.org.
  349. mukt2 has joined
  350. sonny has left
  351. adiaholic has left
  352. Shell has left
  353. Shell has joined
  354. sonny has joined
  355. stpeter has left
  356. adiaholic has joined
  357. mukt2 has left
  358. mathijs has joined
  359. mukt2 has joined
  360. pep. https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/ipr-policy.html I just realized there are two §3.3
  361. edhelas a glitch in the Matrix ?
  362. Wojtek has left
  363. pep. (pushed a fix)
  364. sonny has left
  365. sonny has joined
  366. intosi The redirect is in place.
  367. remko has joined
  368. pdurbin has joined
  369. stpeter has joined
  370. sonny has left
  371. sonny has joined
  372. pdurbin has left
  373. calvin has joined
  374. stpeter has left
  375. calvin has left
  376. calvin has joined
  377. stpeter has joined
  378. karoshi has left
  379. karoshi has joined
  380. Guus Thanks intosi !
  381. Shell has left
  382. lovetox has joined
  383. jjrh So NATO uses xmpp for their chat?
  384. lorddavidiii has left
  385. lorddavidiii has joined
  386. lorddavidiii has left
  387. emus has left
  388. Kev https://xmpp.org/about/faq.html says so :)
  389. lorddavidiii has joined
  390. !XSF_Martin has left
  391. Kev For tactical chat, anyway, which doesn't imply all chat.
  392. lorddavidiii has left
  393. lorddavidiii has joined
  394. sezuan has left
  395. stpeter has left
  396. stpeter has joined
  397. sezuan has joined
  398. mukt2 > For tactical chat, anyway, which doesn't imply all chat. What could be the reason for using it in tactical chat?
  399. sezuan has left
  400. jjrh That's pretty nifty, I knew there was a chat product targeted at the military, but didn't realize it was a NATO thing.
  401. Kev Federation, open standards, good story for security labeling/rbac, constrained bandwidth.
  402. lovetox mukt2, they probably didnt select XMPP
  403. lovetox they have a contractor who offers a piece of software that does what NATO specified
  404. lovetox and this contractor uses XMPP
  405. Kev lovetox: That is not the case :)
  406. jjrh Is there a source/reference to this claim? (not disputing it, only curious to know more)
  407. lovetox no? NATO has an IT dep that writes all the software themself? doubt it
  408. jonas’ lovetox, there’s a wide range of options between that
  409. jonas’ they could for example have made a survey of open chat standards and made a bidding for a contractor which can deliver that
  410. lovetox not really, either you write it yourself, or you write user requirements and let it write someone else
  411. jonas’ XMPP could’ve been part of the requirements
  412. lovetox yeah, fair could be
  413. Kev jonas’: (And is)
  414. lovetox then the answer is obvious, probably because it is open and a standard
  415. lovetox and is there really an alternative?
  416. dwd The last NATO bid I was part of was explicitly requiring XMPP, since that was an existing deployed and federated standard.
  417. !XSF_Martin has joined
  418. Kev But as I mentioned above, XMPP has more going for it for that community than *just* being an open standard. It's an open standard that has desirable properties.
  419. dwd That was a looong time ago, but nothing's changed since.
  420. dwd jjrh, FWIW, it's awkward because it's very difficult to know what *can* be discussed openly (some of it certainly is classified) and what people *want* to be discussed openly, which is somewhat different. Often organisations like NATO default to assuming everything is not to be discussed.
  421. dwd jjrh, But if you search for "NATO XMPP" on a popular search engine of your choice, you'll very likely find things, and the Google search suggestions might even give you pointers...
  422. jonas’ > isode.com
  423. jonas’ I’m not surprised ;)
  424. Kev That is a place you might end up.
  425. jonas’ that’s the first two hits, then it’s xmpp.org
  426. mukt2 has left
  427. dwd Honestly, the Google search suggestions is the bigger hint.
  428. jonas’ I get none for "nato xmpp" or "xmpp nato"
  429. jonas’ https://sotecware.net/images/dont-puush-me/y6MWvbJIbWJqEk7TWc0Ze6__bA2iuR8VVNhzGkumpEE.png
  430. dwd Oh, how disappointing.
  431. Kev dwd: Yeah, it's your history :)
  432. moparisthebest search bubble'd
  433. dwd I thought I'd checked on icognito.
  434. jjrh Half of my reason for asking for a source was that it would be useful to point to there from xmpp.org
  435. jjrh https://nhqc3s.hq.nato.int/Apps/Architecture/NISP2/cpbprf.aspx?vndb=standards&vsbn=n&refid=fmn2&sbbs=y
  436. Kev All the stuff I'm finding using slightly more informed keywords is coming up behind walls, unfortunately.
  437. Kev So I'm not finding useful breadcrumbs either.
  438. jjrh "Basic Text-based Collaboration Chatroom Profile" lists xeps
  439. jonas’ jjrh, we *did* have "Battle-tested" as part of the slogan on xmpp.org, but that was removed last year
  440. dwd That always did make me giggle.
  441. Zash Why!
  442. jonas’ https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/commit/39455a69d97601b5af091261a892e170c7c2ef62
  443. jonas’ github doesn’t show me the PR this belonged t
  444. jonas’ github doesn’t show me the PR this belonged to
  445. pep. I'm not especially proud of NATO using XMPP fwiw, but I'll leave it at that
  446. Kev jonas’: "W. Martin Borgert" it says doesn't it?
  447. jonas’ that doesn’t tell me which PR number this was
  448. MattJ It usually does :/
  449. jjrh proud isn't the right word, but it's a useful selling point to give people when they ask who's using XMPP.
  450. jonas’ jjrh, depending who you’re talking to, really
  451. Kev jonas’: Sorry, misunderstood the point you were making.
  452. jonas’ Kev, I recall that there was a brief discussion in the PR, and I wanted to link it
  453. jonas’ but I can’t find it
  454. jonas’ sometimes I hate github
  455. Guus "military grade" typically implies "of good quality".
  456. jjrh jonas’, of course, /some/ people. but regardless of how you feel about NATO/military it does imply a certain amount of robustness and flexibility
  457. jonas’ jjrh, people are ready to ignore the implications in face of that
  458. jonas’ Guus, to be honest, nowadays, military grade mainly implies marketing to me when it’s about IM
  459. jjrh jonas’, those people probably already got sold when you told them it's a IETF standard :)
  460. jonas’ "military grad encryption!!!k"
  461. Daniel > proud isn't the right word, but it's a useful selling point to give people when they ask who's using XMPP. It's not just nato. It's also other government agencies. Lots of people 'who have something to hide'. But those people are never very chatty about that
  462. j.r has left
  463. mukt2 has joined
  464. j.r has joined
  465. Kev jonas’: As far as I can see, there was no PR here.
  466. mathijs has left
  467. mathijs has joined
  468. Guus jonas’ I can understand that if you read about something being advertised as 'military grade' without knowing if it's actually being used by the military. Apparently, for XMPP, it's the other way around.
  469. sonny has left
  470. jonas’ Kev, I recall discussion on github, it must’ve been somewhere
  471. Kev Github might simply be lying to me.
  472. mukt2 has left
  473. sonny has joined
  474. mukt2 has joined
  475. moparisthebest XMPP can use AES, and we all know AES is "military grade" :)
  476. Nekit has left
  477. Nekit has joined
  478. mathijs has left
  479. mathijs has joined
  480. emus has joined
  481. mukt2 > All the stuff I'm finding using slightly more informed keywords is coming up behind walls, unfortunately. > So I'm not finding useful breadcrumbs either. Maybe something open source must be written on the subject.
  482. lovetox has left
  483. dwd Most of it is fairly dry, like: https://aplits.disa.mil/docs/UC-XMPP2013C1.pdf
  484. krauq has left
  485. krauq has joined
  486. krauq has left
  487. mukt2 has left
  488. mukt2 has joined
  489. krauq has joined
  490. lovetox has joined
  491. pdurbin has joined
  492. !XSF_Martin has left
  493. debacle has left
  494. debacle has joined
  495. adiaholic has left
  496. adiaholic has joined
  497. sonny has left
  498. pdurbin has left
  499. !XSF_Martin has joined
  500. emus has left
  501. remko has left
  502. remko has joined
  503. goffi has left
  504. goffi has joined
  505. lovetox has left
  506. sonny has joined
  507. remko has left
  508. adiaholic has left
  509. Vaulor has left
  510. Vaulor has joined
  511. stpeter has left
  512. lorddavidiii has left
  513. mukt2 has left
  514. mukt2 has joined
  515. lorddavidiii has joined
  516. matlag has left
  517. emus has joined
  518. remko has joined
  519. sonny has left
  520. sonny has joined
  521. Yagiza has left
  522. Daniel has left
  523. sonny has left
  524. Daniel has joined
  525. !XSF_Martin has left
  526. sonny has joined
  527. Nekit has left
  528. dwd I know that there aren't many Windows users here, but there's a serious vulnerability in ECC in all versions of Windows, so make sure you're up on that.
  529. moparisthebest yep https://kb.cert.org/vuls/id/849224/ for more context
  530. sonny has left
  531. sonny has joined
  532. paul has left
  533. edhelas https://nl.movim.eu/?about#statistics_tab Gajim is quite high actually !
  534. Zash ECC bad. AES good. Something something :)
  535. moparisthebest you mean RSA but yea probably :)
  536. Zash Ref to the earlier "military grade" message ;)
  537. !XSF_Martin has joined
  538. pdurbin has joined
  539. Shell has joined
  540. mukt2 has left
  541. pdurbin has left
  542. Wojtek has joined
  543. mukt2 has joined
  544. Martin has joined
  545. Martin Is it just me or does no link in the xmpp.org header work without allowing scripts from ajax.googleapis.com?
  546. andrey.g has left
  547. rion has joined
  548. mukt2 has left
  549. dele has joined
  550. jonas’ it’s just you
  551. mathijs has left
  552. mathijs has joined
  553. !XSF_Martin has left
  554. sonny has left
  555. !XSF_Martin has joined
  556. mathijs has left
  557. mathijs has joined
  558. debacle has left
  559. dele has left
  560. sonny has joined
  561. goffi has left
  562. Martin ;-(
  563. Martin Oh, now it works.
  564. mukt2 has joined
  565. Nekit has joined
  566. sonny has left
  567. debacle has joined
  568. krauq has left
  569. krauq has joined
  570. mukt2 has left
  571. mathijs has left
  572. mathijs has joined
  573. mathijs has left
  574. mathijs has joined
  575. marc has left
  576. mr.fister has joined
  577. mathijs has left
  578. mathijs has joined
  579. sonny has joined
  580. andrey.g has joined
  581. andrey.g has left
  582. stpeter has joined
  583. andrey.g has joined
  584. mr.fister has left
  585. !XSF_Martin has left
  586. pdurbin has joined
  587. marc has joined
  588. !XSF_Martin has joined
  589. j.r has left
  590. j.r has joined
  591. mukt2 has joined
  592. sonny has left
  593. Tobias has left
  594. Wojtek has left
  595. pdurbin has left
  596. emus has left
  597. j.r has left
  598. j.r has joined
  599. emus has joined
  600. Vaulor has left
  601. Nekit has left
  602. remko has left
  603. remko has joined
  604. sonny has joined
  605. mukt2 has left
  606. j.r has left
  607. j.r has joined
  608. paul has joined
  609. calvin has left
  610. remko has left
  611. tom has joined
  612. tom Hello,
  613. tao has joined
  614. tom Why does it say XEP-0363 is still lastcall?
  615. tom https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0363.html
  616. tao has left
  617. tom What is the status of XEP-0363 currently?
  618. jonas’ tom, the status is that I need to re-issue the LC
  619. jonas’ thanks for reminding me
  620. tom Ok
  621. tom Thank you
  622. tom But just to be clear, it's still not considered 'stable' yet or is at the last stage until stable?
  623. jonas’ please check the roadmap on the top right
  624. jonas’ LC is the stage before Draft
  625. jonas’ it is probably only not-draft for formal reasons and those should be resolved within the next month or so
  626. mukt2 has joined
  627. tom Thanks for clarifying
  628. calvin has joined
  629. lorddavidiii has left
  630. jonas’ sent a mail regarding that to standards@
  631. lorddavidiii has joined
  632. sonny has left
  633. sonny has joined
  634. mathijs has left
  635. mathijs has joined
  636. Martin has left
  637. sonny has left
  638. lorddavidiii has left
  639. Alex has left
  640. Alex has joined
  641. sonny has joined
  642. Daniel has left
  643. Daniel has joined
  644. emus has left
  645. Shell has left
  646. Daniel has left
  647. Daniel has joined
  648. Daniel has left
  649. pdurbin has joined
  650. debacle has left
  651. pdurbin has left
  652. Daniel has joined
  653. Daniel has left
  654. !XSF_Martin has left
  655. !XSF_Martin has joined
  656. david has left
  657. mukt2 has left
  658. Daniel has joined
  659. calvin has left
  660. calvin has joined
  661. stpeter has left
  662. mukt2 has joined
  663. Daniel has left
  664. david has joined
  665. mukt2 has left
  666. mukt2 has joined
  667. mukt2 has left