How do client devs feel about implementing references of type=mention?
Kev
Feel in what sense?
MattJ
Why does (afaict) only a single client support it right now?
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Kev
I think it's particularly useful for servers too, when generating notifications.
MattJ
Right, I'm involved in such a project
Kev
But I'm intending Swift does them when we get to it.
MattJ
But if you use most XMPP clients with this server, no notifications are generated
jonas’
MattJ, I don’t feel particularly enthusiastic about implementing anything References until my comments from three years ago are at least addressed
jonas’
and by addressed, in this context, I mean "replied to", because not even that happende (beyond "someone will rewrite the XEP soon so no point in dealing with this right now")
jonas’
oh, just two years: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-March/034559.html
MattJ
Is it related to character counting? or something else?
MattJ
I thought the character counting stuff reached some kind of consensus
paulhas joined
paulhas left
MattJ
and that was the primary blocker in my mind
Kev
MattJ: I mean when the server is generating push notifications, it can do so based on the presence of a mention reference. As well.
paulhas joined
Kev
MattJ: Jonas also (sensibly) wanted extensible reference types (mentions etc.).
MattJ
Kev, you mean "as well as text scanning"?
Kev
MattJ: I mean as well as the receiving client generating notifications based on something having put mentions in.
MattJ
It's a tough sell for me to add a feature that emails someone with the nick "max" every time someone asks "what's the max number of items this can handle?"
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
MattJ
Their current stance is "Why don't XMPP clients support mentions? The ecosystem seems terrible"
Kev
I don't think I'm suggesting that, am I?
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
Kev
I'm not intentionally doing so, at least!
Zash
What's this then MattJ ?
MattJ
Zash, only works if I'm online and connected, and their primary client is a web app
MattJ
and I don't want to use it, but I can't notify people when I send them a message :)
MattJ
(and this isn't just about me - they /want/ to say they support arbitrary XMPP clients)
MattJ
But if they advertise that as a feature, people will wonder why nobody answers them when they mention them
DebXWoodyhas left
Ge0rGhas left
DebXWoodyhas joined
Ge0rGhas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has joined
Zash
Cry and implement some server-side heuristics? Like only looking for nicknames at the start of lines
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Shellhas left
LNJhas joined
Shellhas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
calvinhas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
pdurbinhas joined
DebXWoodyhas left
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mimi89999has left
mimi89999has joined
calvinhas left
DebXWoodyhas joined
goffihas joined
Shellhas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
pdurbinhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has left
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has joined
debxwoodyhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Alex
I have started memberbot for collection votes on our current Q1-2020 application period
adiaholichas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Neustradamushas joined
Jeybehas joined
Jeybe
Hey all. What XEP does a Client / Server need to support for sending and receiving if a message was read?
Jeybe
Is this done within XEP-0085: Chat State Notifications or is there something seperate / additional?
calvinhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
jonas’
Jeybe, XEP-0184 (Message Receipts)
Jeybe
Isn't that just a delivery receipt and no info about whether a message was read or not?
Jeybe
Or do I get that wrong
pep.
Alex, thanks
Kev
Jeybe: You're correct. People typically use 333 for that.
Kev
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0333.html
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
Jeybe
Kev: Ah, thank you. Many clients seem to support this, although it's a deferred spec. Just no one who is able or willing to finish it correctly?
pep.
Deferred doesn't especially mean unfinished
pep.
When do we kill this state again :x
Kev
Jeybe: That's a reasonable approximation of a description, yes :)
Jeybe
Kev: Ok, thanks
Douglas Terabytehas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
mukt2has left
Douglas Terabytehas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
Maxhas left
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
Maxhas joined
Shellhas left
jonas’
Jeybe: sorry, I misread your message and thought you wrote "received" instead of read
calvinhas left
Marchas left
Marchas joined
Guus
memberbot is online for member applications for Q1. If you read this, you might as well cast your votes now. 🙂
jonas’
emus: re https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Edward_Maurer_Application_2020
jonas’
you say you work in the wind power industry, yet you claim no company affiliation
jonas’
I don't think that's right
emus
The company uses.....Skype f B. 😃🎉🎊
jonas’
I'm not sure that matters
emus
I`m saying I apply as a private person.
jonas’
my understanding is that we have limits on the share of members per company
Kev
Correct.
emus
What do expect from me?
jonas’
I think you can only apply as individual in general
emus
Ehm, so I did?
jonas’
what I'm saying is that you're still affiliated with your employer and need to say so
jonas’
I *think*
jonas’
that's at least how I understand the rules and how I wrote my own application
Guus
emus: basically, to avoid companies trying to take over the world, starting with the XSF, we'd like to make sure that the number of members do not all affiliate to the same company. Just mention the name of your company, and all is good.
goffihas left
Guus
Bylaws have the details, if you're interested.
Ge0rG
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html#mandatory
> Any affiliations, as described within the final clause of the XSF Bylaws, Section 2.1. Note that this is not limited to employment, but must include it.
pep.
"Note that this is not limited to employment" interesting
jonas’
I also disclosed my university when I was still a student
jonas’
(for that reason)
Ge0rG
and the bylaws:
> An applicant for membership may not be admitted if, at the time of application or consideration, fifteen percent (15%) of the Members of the Corporation are employed by or represent the same corporation or organization as that corporation or organization which employs the applicant or is represented by the applicant.
fippo
there goes the evil plan to hire a lot of contractors and take over the xsf...
pep.
fippo, yeah, the bylaws saw you coming!!
Kev
I'm sure you have backup evil plans.
emus
Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself.
Guys, that what I voluntarily has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused....✎
calvinhas joined
jonas’
> memberbot is online for member applications for Q1. If you read this, you might as well cast your votes now. 🙂
I set out to prove that I can read this message on my mobile, yet voting would be impractical. Instead, I completed the voting process, so, well played.
emus
Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself.
Guys, that what I voluntarily do in XMPP has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused.... ✏
Ge0rG
emus: humans are often influenced by their employers in more or less sublte ways, therefore it's required to tell the XSF who your employer is
adiaholichas joined
jonas’
> Its just saying what I do as giving some information about myself.
> Guys, that what I voluntarily has absolutely nothing to with where I work. I'm confused....
same for me. doesn't change the bylaws rules tho.
Guus
> I set out to prove that I can read this message on my mobile, yet voting would be impractical. Instead, I completed the voting process, so, well played.
Muwhahahaa
emus
Im a working student...
emus
No, then I refuse my application.
jonas’
emus: I'm not particularly fond of those rules either. But I understand that they are useful to keep the XSF independent.
pep.
I understand the XSF has to know about it, I still don't understand why this has to be made public
lorddavidiiihas left
jonas’
emus: on the bright side, nothing of what you stated in your application strictly requires membership
lorddavidiiihas joined
jonas’
pep.: maybe because nobody asked for it to be private yet? sounds like a board topic to fix that.
mukt2has joined
emus
I got asked to apply, because some appeciated what I did 🤷♂️ So I said, yes is fine
Zash
I think we've mentioned that it's probably doable to have only the Secretary know
pep.
jonas’, yeah I encouraged him, and I did completely forget this "detail". Nothing requires him to be a member indeed, it's mostly to show interest
pep.
jonas’, I don't think enough people care yet, so proposing this to board would be a waste of time and maybe even harmful. I'm happy to lead this if I'm proven wrong
emus
I can tell privately where work to someone responsible, but I would not like to put it online.
jonas’
pep.: to be honest, I don't like this requirement either. It did put me off back then for a moment.
pep.
Note that this topic has come up every last membership vote I think
jonas’
so I'd support a motion for defining a way to declare affiliations privately
lskdjf
> pep.: maybe because nobody asked for it to be private yet? sounds like a board topic to fix that.
actually there have been multiple people asking for private information like full name and employer not to be in a public wiki anymore. So yeah if that could be brought up with board, that would be nice.
jonas’
did it? I only recall the anonymity thing
pep.
Well this kind of mitigates the anonymity issue
pep.
Anonymity is not an on/off switch as you know :)
jonas’
does it?
Ge0rG
I still think that for a public standards organizations, it's important to have public information about the members and their affiliations
emus
Actually I dropped, saying in which industry I work, to even more say that this has no relation 😅
pep.
emus, I'm sorry but that doesn't help :/
Guus
I'm with Ge0rG
pep.
I'm not
lskdjf
> I still think that for a public standards organizations, it's important to have public information about the members and their affiliations
I think you can argue that for people that have been voted into council, board and the secretary. however, not for normal members.
emus
But does everyone here dropped exactly where their work or study?
Ge0rG
lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs
jonas’
emus: check the applications
emus
> I think you can argue that for people that have been voted into council, board and the secretary. however, not for normal members.
Yes, I wonder as well
pep.
Ge0rG, that's diverting
lskdjf
Ge0rG, I'm aware of that. What's your point?
emus
> emus: check the applications
What exactly?
jonas’
> lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs
though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonomously✎
Ge0rG
lskdjf: membership is responsible for voting people into public positions, so I think the transparency requirements extend here
jonas’
> lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs
though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonymously ✏
pep.
members don't have to submit XEPs either
lskdjf
> though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonomously
jonas’ it's not allowed according to ... xep 001 or so
jonas’
> What exactly?
emus, just open them and you'll see that people disclose their employer
adiaholichas left
jonas’
it's on my user page for example
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
emus
Will check again, but havent recognised that as a mandatory point
emus
also not that everyone was telling
lskdjf
> lskdjf: membership is responsible for voting people into public positions, so I think the transparency requirements extend here
Ge0rG Legislations require a presitent of a country to make all sorts of information public. That doesn't mean that the voting directory should be online.
Guus
It is mandatory. Check the bylaws. If not everyone included the information, that was an omission in their application.
marchas left
jonas’
reading the bylaws of the organization you're trying to join seems like a good idea either way
emus
Okay guys, lets making simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.✎
pep.
jonas’, so yeah I can bring that to board, but it's likely to get shot down :)
Ge0rG
lskdjf: I'm aware of that. What's your point?
emus
Okay guys, lets make itsimple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way. ✏
emus
Okay guys, lets make it simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way. ✏
jonas’
Alex, cc, see emus message above
lskdjf
Ge0rG, 😛 well, I was drawing an analogy.
pep.
emus, sorry, and thanks :)
emus
> emus, sorry, and thanks :)
No problem
pep.
Also why I think the XSF won't change as long as we don't let new people like this in.
emus
XMPP wondering why no one gives a shit about it.... 🤔✎
lskdjf
yeah xsf tends to be a bunch of people that "have been doing things this way forever and want it to stay that way" at times.
lskdjf: I'm only part of the XSF for five years now, and I think that the current requirements for becoming a member are adequate.
emus
Didn`t meant to bother you procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway✎
mukt2has left
emus
Didn`t meant to bother your procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway ✏
Ge0rG
I'm pretty sure that it's possible to ask Board for a change to these rules without being a member, though.
pep.
But it's not possible to vote
marchas joined
Guus
emus: that's on you. We have very public records and bylaws.
Guus
don't blame us for not doing your homework.
emus
> emus: that's on you. We have very public records and bylaws.
> don't blame us for not doing your homework.
I don't blame and I read it of course, still missed that spot
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
lskdjfhas left
Guus
I'm going to drop out of this conversation. It is ticking a nerve, which doesn't help me being a useful participant.
pep.
Guus, I think that's on us. That could be made a bit more obvious. https://xmpp.org/community/membership.html this doesn't mention anything about the requirements, it just links to thing
pep.
(yes yes we can all PR)
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Daniel
Why is this suddenly coming up?
Ge0rG
There is obviously a trade-off between allowing people who need their private information protected, but also anonymous trolls, vs. the transparency of a public and open standards organization.
Ge0rG
Daniel: because it's election time
emus
> Why is this suddenly coming up?
Because I havent named my company, as I missed that requirement, but also doesnt want to put the information online
Daniel
Yes. But it was never a big topic before
pep.
it has
pep.
multiple times
Ge0rG
Daniel: anonymous participation has been a topic before, some times.
Daniel
Yeah. I was more referring to the affiliations part
calvinhas left
emus
But its not anonymous anymore actually
pep.
This is not full anonymity towards the XSF mind
emus
once I put my name
jonas’
muc_semianon
pep.
kinda
Daniel
Tbh I'm not really sure what affiliation means in the context of my being self employed
pep.
You have to disclose every single one of your clients!
pep.
hrhr
emus
😅
pep.
But hmm, tbh, I think that's what "Note that this is not limited to employment" means
pdurbinhas joined
Daniel
I'm sure that at least 50 percent of my customers aren't happy with me doing that
pep.
I'm sure of that :)
adiaholichas joined
littlesmileyhas joined
Kev
The "not company" thing is because e.g. most OSS projects aren't company-based within XMPP.
pdurbinhas left
Kev
But if 30 people working for different companies, all of whom were working on Swift were to apply, the XSF should care.
larma
> It is mandatory. Check the bylaws. If not everyone included the information, that was an omission in their application.
I think it's funny how everyone has assumptions what is in the bylaws, but nobody ever actually seems to verify them...
mukt2has joined
larma
> to be eligible for membership, a person, corporation, organization, or other entity must complete a written membership application in such form as shall be adopted by the Board of Directors from time to time. The substance of such membership application must be included in a notice to the Members of the meeting at which such membership application is considered.
> The Secretary shall have general charge of the membership records of the Corporation and shall keep, at the principal office of the Corporation, a record of the Members showing the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number and electronic mail address of each Member.
emus
> The "not company" thing is because e.g. most OSS projects aren't company-based within XMPP.
> But if 30 people working for different companies, all of whom were working on Swift were to apply, the XSF should care.
I intended to tell the branch where I work, but also that it has (unfortunatly) nothing to do with XMPP.
But yes, till then I didnt knew about that requirement
littlesmileyhas left
larma
Nowhere in the bylaws it says that things go public at all (beside board members). Members receive the "substance" of the application (that doesn't need to include company if that's not substantial), the membership records are with the secretary. Of course board can decide to only accept public membership applications in the wiki that include company details, but it's *not* in the bylaws, don't claim that.
debxwoodyhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
MattJ
I haven't read the entire discussion, but yeah, I'm in the category or "Self-employed and not going to dump a list of my clients in the wiki"✎
MattJ
I haven't read the entire discussion, but yeah, I'm in the category of "Self-employed and not going to dump a list of my clients in the wiki" ✏
littlesmileyhas joined
adiaholichas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
adiaholichas joined
j.rhas left
eevvoorhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
goffihas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Alex
We had many similar applications in the past where people were just saying that they are self employed or apply as an individual. Because he is saying that his work is not realted to XMPP at all I did not pay further attention.
If this is a problem and you think it violates the bylaws (which everyone reads difefrent ;-) ) I can ask him to disclose with employer directly to me only
lorddavidiiihas left
jonas’
Alex, emus retracted the application
mukt2has left
lorddavidiiihas joined
Alex
it is still on the Wiki, don't think we defined somewhere on how to retract an application ;-)
mukt2has joined
emus
jonas’: I retraced, as understood that was mandatory. I am fine to tell Alex privately where I work, if that is within the process
moparisthebest
I don't think I've ever listed my employer either and no one said anything, my employer has nothing to do with xmpp or even chat
emus
as said
emus
I am.okay with other option
adiaholichas left
moparisthebest
I wouldn't want to list it on the wiki either, my employer is kind of odd about "don't mention us on social media or anything that might be construed as you representing us" but I wouldn't mind telling Alex , just no one has ever asked
jubalhhas left
jubalhhas joined
j.rhas joined
larma
MattJ, there is no reason by the bylaws to disclose clients of a self-employed person. You'd only need to disclose to board/secretary when you are employed by or represent a company so they can apply the maximum 15% rule.
ralphm
The whole idea behind it is just that we want to prevent companies to be overrepresented in our membership.
ralphm
Right
MattJ
I totally get the idea behind it
MattJ
But from the day it was first proposed I said I didn't see how it would actually work
MattJ
I've never listed anything and nobody has ever complained :)
pep.
It doesn't seem to be applied very much anyway
ralphm
I don't there is a problem to solve right now. If someone finds that the 15% rule can be argued to be broken, we can go back and fix it.
moparisthebest
Nothing stops anyone from just lying, or simply not putting anything, apparently :)
larma
The assumption seems to be that everyone would be so kind to mention company info if it was relevant
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
pep.
moparisthebest, yeah that's true of every info you give anyway :)
ralphm
I think self-employed is totally fine.
mukt2has left
MattJ
If I (hypothetically) did a 3-month contract for Isode (picking one well-represented company in the XSF community) in the middle of my membership period, what should happen?
ralphm
Lies will be caught up with, I don't see a problem.
ralphm
MattJ, we'd talk about it
MattJ
and it would be my fault if I forgot to mention it?
neshtaxmpphas joined
larma
MattJ, are you representing their interest when making use of your XSF membership rights? If no, then it doesn't matter
MattJ
Does it specify anywhere that I have to update the XSF if my status with a company changes between applications?
jonas’
if my employer enters a three month contract to build infrastructure for, say, NATO messaging, would I have to disclose that?✎
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
MattJ
and how do I know which companies I need to notify the XSF about, and which I don't?
MattJ
Obviously I've been around a while and could guess a few, but it seems pretty arbitrary
jonas’
if my employer enters a three month contract to build infrastructure for, say, NATO messaging, would I have to disclose that (assuming that I’m assigned to work on that)? ✏
MattJ
If the honest answer is "it's fine, you'll know if you're (close to) breaking the rules and we trust everyone to be honest" then I'm fine with the status quo
pep.
Of some putting their affiliations and some not? And asking every new member to? :p
moparisthebest
assuming it was actually enforced, I'm not sure I see any advantage anyway, if one company wanted to hijack messaging standards they could just start their own standards organization and do it anyway, maybe call themselves Matrix or something?
calvinhas joined
ralphm
MattJ: your last statement is my vantage point
pep.
I'm curious what you think is the status quo though
mukt2has joined
MattJ
pep., you just summed it up :)
pep.
I don't like this
pep.
Why would we force it on new members while not on others
MattJ
We historically haven't forced it
pep.
Seems pretty random to me
davidhas left
Kev
For my point of view, I think having some protection against representation/flooding is worthwhile. I'm fine with that protection not being public (although I think it's useful to default to public where people are willing). I think some guidance on what to disclose would be useful.
MattJ
We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it
ralphm
The status quo is that every few days other parts of our bylaws are scrutinized to see if there's an issue. I think it would be better to focus on things when there's an actual problem in need dire need for solving.
Ge0rG
If we don't strictly enforce this rule, how are we supposed to prevent being hijacked?
MattJ
Ge0rG, it beats not having a rule and then not being able to enforce it when you need to
emus
> If we don't strictly enforce this rule, how are we supposed to prevent being hijacked?
I mean, one could also lie... you would have to proof it anyway or?
davidhas joined
pep.
emus, what MattJ said.
Ge0rG
MattJ: okay, I can see that.
calvinhas left
emus
If you agree, I can tell Alex, or anyone else privately, as long that kept privately
pep.
I also think it's a worthwile rule to have. I'm happy to rework the implementation
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
Ge0rG
So maybe somebody should change XEP-0345 into "affiliations can be made public, and must be communicated to the Secretary otherwise"
emus
(I also understand that XSF fears to get hijacked of course)
pep.
Ge0rG, 345 doesn't actually say this information has to be public does it?
pep.
ah it does
pep.
Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assume in the document✎
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
pep.
Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assumed in the document ✏
Ge0rG, it says applicants must provide, not to whom
pep.
That doesn't say public. It talks about giving info to the Secretary and allowing members to vote
Ge0rG
> As a secondary purpose, it also allows the XSF members to make an informed decision when voting to accept applications
pep.
yes
Jeybehas left
Ge0rG
that implies that members will see this.
pep.
Sure
pep.
That's already better than "On a public wiki"
Ge0rG
and §3 says it has to be in the wiki
Ge0rG
pep.: I'm sure you can provide a better wording as a PR :D
pep.
I'm working on it
ralphm
emus, there is no fear. This rule exists so we can take action in case a company is overrepresented based on that rule, instead of some vague notion of 'too much'.
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
jonas’
15:51:07 MattJ> We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it
I did, today.
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
MattJ
I didn't scroll back that far, I guess :)
MattJ
I'm definitely against picking on random people
emus
> emus, there is no fear. This rule exists so we can take action in case a company is overrepresented based on that rule, instead of some vague notion of 'too much'.
Ok, I understand
jonas’
I wasn’t aware I was picking on anyone in particular. I admit that I probably don’t scan applications of "famous" people like Dave as thoroughly as I do for others, though
jonas’
I simply assumed it was an oversight
jonas’
(and, to be frank, I also assumed that Alex would screen the applications, as he said he also keeps tab on the 15% rule at some point)
larma
jonas’, he can keep tab on the 15% even without getting company names 😉
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
larma
like, we currrently have one applicant that works in a company in the wind power industry and no other member that does, so that implies his company is not overrepresented ;)
ralphm
Yes, until we only have 8 members, which is yet another problem.
ralphm
I'm happy for Alex to continue doing what he's been doing and if someone at some point feels a company is overrepresented we can look into it.
serge90has left
adiaholichas joined
Alex
as @ralphm said. The ruile is there to take action if we thing a componany is overpresented or someone is raising concerns with that.
I am not compiling and verifiying the stats after every election.
larma
ralphm, +1 - as long as we make sure that applicants that obviously are not overrepresenting a company don't feel any repression to apply I see no issue.
It just feels very absurd to not accept an active community member like emus purely based on the fact that we don't know the company even if we do know that it is not overrepresented.
pep.
Where is a good venue that's not standards because it's about the membership, but also not members@ because that's not opened to non-members (right?)
Marchas left
Marchas joined
littlesmileyhas left
littlesmileyhas joined
adiaholichas left
Zash
Organizational meta-discussions?
Alex
@emus exposed his employer to me. So I have it in my records
j.rhas left
adiaholichas joined
pep.
Zash, I'd like a place where interested people can also join the discussion. A place where they can say things like "yeah if you do that I'd be interested to join"
emus
> @emus exposed his employer to me. So I have it in my records
Ok, and if someone really really needs to know, I can tell him or her as well
eevvoorhas left
serge90has joined
adiaholichas left
mukt2has left
eevvoorhas joined
j.rhas joined
adiaholichas joined
eevvoorhas left
mukt2has joined
littlesmileyhas left
Jeybehas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
matkorhas left
matkorhas joined
mukt2has left
debaclehas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Jeybehas left
mukt2has joined
Jeybehas joined
vanitasvitaenever disclosed their job either :P
vanitasvitae
Am I even real? 😱
Zash
Are birds real?
pep.
I only see pixels
jonas’
I see fragged people
Ge0rG
I don't even see the pixels. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead.
jonas’
damn, that was the better reference
pdurbinhas joined
jonas’
just proves that it’s been too long since I saw The Matrix
Ge0rG
marc: I've initiated a standards@ thread on the 0401 change, but there was less activity than I anticipated. How can we move it forward now?
neshtaxmpphas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
jonas’
"just do it"
Ge0rG
said the person who just did it.
jonas’
ahem.
jonas’
switching hats all the time sure does get confusing
Ge0rG
* jonas’ puts on his wizard hat and robe.
jonas’
that’s only on friday nights.
jonas’
and also not a wizard, actually
Ge0rG
a lizard, then?
vanitasvitae
Level 7 Valor Bard
Steve Killehas left
neshtaxmpphas left
pdurbinhas left
Steve Killehas joined
DebXWoodyhas left
emus
> vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P
Omg... tbh I read a few application but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵✎
emus
> vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P
Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵 ✏
DebXWoodyhas joined
debaclehas joined
Zash
> The namespace governing this protocol is "http://jabber.org/protocol/commands" (hereafter referred to as x-commands).
What the x-?
jonas’
legacy, probably
Zash
Hm, can't well-known commands take the dataform in the first step?
eevvoorhas joined
vanitasvitae
> Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵
Don't blame me for this now :P
Nekithas left
mukt2has left
marc
Ge0rG: what are our options?
mukt2has joined
emus
> Don't blame me for this now :P
Everything is your fault!!!1! 😉
neshtaxmpphas joined
winfriedhas left
Ge0rG
marc: you read https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2020-January/036848.html and the reply and decide whether you want to accept the change or not
winfriedhas joined
Jeybehas left
jonas’
does anyone know how a Last Call email for a Procedural XEP should look like?
jonas’
otherwise I’m going to cook something up
jonas’
(the old tooling did not support this case, neither does the new)
Jeybehas joined
marc
Looks like shit on mobile, I'll read it later
Ge0rG
marc: yeah :/
jonas’
bahaha
jonas’
man, I should step back from writing emails for today
(and I generally prefer your implementation’s behaviour) ✏
Zash
That reply is exactly what I'm trying to compose
Syndacehas joined
jonas’
:)
Zash
I especially enjoy being able to set (or, keep?) the full vcard to access=presence while having the avatar nodes public, which makes it spit out a vcard-temp with only the avatar
jonas’
yeah, that’s the kind of stuff I was thinking about
emushas left
Zash
There's a thread on 0292 somewhere btw
emushas joined
Zash
That simpler iq syntax doesn't actually help with the MUC thing, since that's afaik an explicit exception for vcard-temp, so you could just as well do the same for a PEP / PubSub query as for a vcard4 iq-get
jonas’
sounds to me as if The Editor™ should re-issue the (expired) LC for '292
marc
Ge0rG, I agree with Daniel and I would prefer to use SASL2 even though I'm not familar with SASL2 at all atm
Ge0rG
marc: SASL2 was introduced in March 2017, and then... nothing happened
Daniel
With me?
Daniel
Thank you.
Daniel
On what?
Ge0rG
Daniel: re XEP-0401
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Ge0rG
marc: my reasons to change 0401 were not to make it perfect but to make it easy to integrate today
marc
Ge0rG, I know but "we" have lots of problem today because "we" did ugly hacks in the past, no?
marc
+s
davidhas left
Zash
It's a hack but there's an Actual Product that uses it, so there's that
Ge0rG
marc: yes, but this is a minor hack on top of an existing hack
marc
I used data forms in the first place because i though it's the best solution
marc
now it seems SASL2 is the "best" solution
Zash
SASL2 for the future! :)
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
waqashas joined
marc
Ge0rG, you argued about complexity during 401 spec development, a hacky solution now and SASL2 later would introduce a shitload of additional and unnecessary complexity on the client and server
Zash
too late
marc
tbh, I don't know how far away we are from SASL2 :)
marc
Zash, hm?
Ge0rG
marc: not so much, because SASL2 will be a nice and clean solution to many problems, including token authentication
Zash
marc: I mean there are implementations already (of 0401 etc)
marc
Ge0rG, yep, but you need backwards compability
marc
-s
Ge0rG
marc: yes, but you'll also need backward compat between SASL2 and IBR, between SASL2 and normal login, etc
marc
Zash, yep, a spec cannot step people from implementing something else ;)
marc
Ge0rG, token if SASL2, no token otherwise? :)
Zash
I do have some SASL2 code stewing fwiw
Ge0rG
marc: no - token via SALS2 or token via IQ if no SASL22
Zash
Need ... a client to test with
Dele Olajidehas left
Ge0rG
Zash: I'd offer help, but... yaxim is not doing SASL directly and instead using Smack, and the current Smack development tree won't work with yaxim
Zash
:(
marc
Zash, SASL2 code for prosody?
Zash
Yes
Dele Olajidehas joined
marc
Daniel, how much effort is it to implement SASL2 in Conversations?
Zash
IIRC the two things I got stuck on was 1) client or something to test with and 2) internal architecture to make it easy to do the things that SASL2 allows
marc
Ge0rG, 401 is not important enough for ugly hacks IMO
Daniel
marc: I don't know a lot about sasl 2 to say. Probably not a lot
Ge0rG
marc: if it's not important, you can accept the ugly hack
marc
432 sounds like a joke from fefe's blog ^^
Zash
I'd imagine SASL2 itself to be easy to implement, but as I said, it might take architectural changes to do fancy parallell things
Ge0rG
marc: however, I'm convinced that we need easy user onboarding and that 0401 is an important step in that direction
marc
Zash, can you give me the link to your SASL2 branch?
Ge0rG
marc: ask MattJ about the experience with 0401 at last FOSDEM
mukt2has left
marc
Ge0rG, I already had a working implementation with ejabberd and Conversations, I know that it is nice
marc
But I don't want to pollute the protocol with more ugly hacks
jonas’
Zash, I could probably look into implementing SASL2 in aioxmpp if you hand me a server to test with
Ge0rG
marc: you had an implementation of 0401 before my change?
marc
jonas’, +1
marc
Ge0rG, yes?
Ge0rG
marc: you need to be more public about your achievements.
marc
Ge0rG, IIRC I posted a screencast ;)
Ge0rG
marc: ...to where?
marc
Ge0rG, even a Gajim implementation!!1!
marc
here or in the Conversations group chat
Ge0rG
marc: that's not adequate.
Ge0rG
People are not reading chat-logs
marc
Ge0rG, I'm pretty sure you read it Ôo
Ge0rG
Also I'm Very Sad Now, because I changed the spec and got the changed spec implemented in yaxim, prosody and I've heard about it being part of recent Conversations
Ge0rG
marc: maybe I'm just getting old
marc
Ge0rG, If not I'm very sorry
Ge0rG
marc: what's the URL?
Ge0rG
Maybe I'll remember when I see it?
Ge0rG
Or maybe I should just go offline and become a potato farmer
jonas’
s/potato/tomato/ #louiz
marc
It's not online anymore because I reinstalled my infrastructure but let me see if I can find it
Yagizahas left
Ge0rG
either way, I was totally unaware of all of that when I made https://yaxim.org/blog/2020/01/31/yaxim-0-dot-9-9-fosdem-edition/
And the logic is mostly handled elsewhere by the same stuff that handles SASL1
Zash
That code is just mapping it to the new wire protocol
Zash
And notably doesn't do any of the fancy stuff SASL2 is meant to allow
Marchas joined
Syndacehas joined
LNJhas left
LNJhas joined
eevvoorhas left
Marchas left
Syndacehas left
Marchas joined
Syndacehas joined
Zash
jonas’, sent that vcard compat reply. I hope I finished it.
marc
Like tasks?
jonas’
Zash, I know that feel
jonas’
Zash, does vcard4 not contain an avatar?
Zash
It can, but why would we when we have '84?
Zash
Or what do you mean?
Douglas Terabytehas joined
Zash
Avatars are separated out and not included stored in the vcard4 PEP node by the Prosody module.
Zash
minus one word
Zash
the post-food slowness
!XSF_Martinhas left
jonas’
Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar?✎
!XSF_Martinhas joined
jonas’
Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar, separately? ✏
Zash
So?
Zash
Yes.
jonas’
just for my understanding
Zash
You probably had the avatar already to show in the contact list or somesuch.
jonas’
Zash, I was asking from a permission perspective mainly
jonas’
i.e. whether the granularity is consistent between vcard4 and vcard-temp
marc
Ge0rG, Zash: how is sasl2 and ibr related? do we always have an authentication (anonymous?) step and then ibr?
Zash
jonas’, It should be consistent, yes.
Zash
marc, they would be related somehow in some way such that everything is nicer
marc
lol
Zash
Oh there's https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html too
Zash
Wait have we been talking about SASL2 when we should have been talking about IBR2?
Zash
Such confuse
marc
hm?
Zash
IBR2 is what you want for 0401
Zash
I think?
marc
Probably, who came up with SASL2?
Zash
Dunno, was it me or Ge0rG ?
Zash
Early connection something 2 that reduces the hackyness of 0401
Nekithas joined
Ge0rG
Maybe it was Daniel?
Ge0rG
XMPP 2!
marc
No bullshit please
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Zash
SASL2, IBR2, Routing2, ... MAM2
Zash
marc, so, IBR2 is for improved registration flows (ask for random profile details, invite tokens, CAPTCHA etc) and SASL2 is for improved login flow (2FA, required password change, stuff) and reducing roundtrips (auth + bind or 198 resumption in one step)
marc
Zash, yep, that's what I thought
marc
Zash, is there a IBR2 XEPs?
marc
-s
eevvoorhas joined
Zash
Linked to it above, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html
marc
I see
marc
But atm I don't see the advantage over regular IBR
eevvoorhas left
adiaholichas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
vanitasvitae
Suprise Blog Post!
https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2020/02/25/how-to-implement-a-xep-for-smack/
vanitasvitae
Fallback Indication was a defenseless victim MWAHAHAHA!!!
emus
I read in the Application Wiki again. And I saw the list there and got reminded that I read that point about the company of course for the application, but didn't felt related to it. So I didn't actually thought about nameing it (and of course for privacy reasons). Further, I thought it would be mandatory only if you work in a company that has any interest or relation to XMPP topics.
So, maybe that should be cleared out in the future, that, where ever you work as individual (StarBucks or Microsoft) you have to put it to the application.
emus
> Suprise Blog Post!
> https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2020/02/25/how-to-implement-a-xep-for-smack/
Can you drop it to the march newsletter:
emus
?
pep.
ugh I hadn't realized Fallback Indication had been accepted..
pep.
vanitasvitae, I know it's "just an example" but this is a bad use of 428, considering there's already EME (0380) :/
pep.
And we all know people just look at examples
pdurbinhas joined
vanitasvitae
yeah thats true
vanitasvitae
actually that example made me think that the XEP itself is useless 😀
vanitasvitae
But I can imagine some use case for it server side.
jonas’
vanitasvitae, neat blog post
vanitasvitae
thanks 😉
pep.
Yeah I also like the blog post otherwise :)
pep.
Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting? If it's not too much a hassle
vanitasvitae
My WP theme doesn't support it unfortunately 🙁
vanitasvitae
Maybe there is a plugin for that..
pep.
k
jonas’
I bet there is. and I wouldn’t be surprised if it came with a free remote shell!
vanitasvitae
exactly 😛
Marchas left
Marchas joined
marc
Ge0rG, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of IBR dataforms somewhere?
debaclehas left
jonas’
no need to, it contains XEP-0004
Wojtekhas joined
debaclehas joined
Zash
jonas’, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of XEP-0004 somewhere? :P
jonas’
from a different docmuent, but I think it also applies to IBR:
> Sturctured data, beyond lists of text and JIDs, can not be represented with Data Forms (XEP-0004) [9] at all. Machine-readable data would also have to be human-readable at the same time to provide a fallback view for human users. Interationalization of such human-readable data in field values is not possible with Data Forms (XEP-0004) [9].
jonas’
Zash, as a matter of fact, I did, in a recent ProtoXEP
Ge0rG
marc: yes, but I don't remember where. Might have been on list on the initial 0401 submission
Jeybehas left
marc
Ge0rG, hm, okay
pdurbinhas left
Ge0rG
My biggest issue was that a client now has to check whether a data form is fully equivalent to plain IBR plus the token
Ge0rG
And then display the regular IBR dialog instead of a full data form dialog
Ge0rG
For which I don't have support anyway
LNJhas left
Ge0rG
I'm lost now. https://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=site%3Amail.jabber.org+%22XEP-0401%22&oq=site%3Amail.jabber.org+%22XEP-0401%22&aqs=heirloom-srp..
jonas’
weiird
jonas’
from searching for "council", I get the impression that google doesn’t have anything newer than 2017 in its indices
jonas’
ah, 2019-march, too
vanitasvitae
> Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting?
Done 😉
pep.
woo :)
pep.
Now it's even more obvious for people to just copy the code!!
moparisthebesthas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Tobiashas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Nekithas left
Jeybehas joined
pep.
Alex, https://github.com/xsf/memberbot/pull/1
pep.
An idea of why memberbot is so slow btw? Or is it my server again being too far?
jonas’
it introduces an intentional delay I think to make it feel more realistic?
pep.
hah
pep.
It's even setting "composing"
jonas’
it also sends typing notifications in case you haven’t ... yeah :)
jonas’
I quite like that actually
pep.
Not too uncanny yet, we're good
Ge0rG
Say what? It's adding latency to feel more human like?
Ge0rG
I haven't tested yet but I hate it already...
paulhas left
Zash
Should fix the thing where messages end up before the responses due to sorting by timestamps with insufficient precision :)
pep.
Real life hacks(tm)
pep.
btw ad-hoc voting is not enabled on memberbot?
pep.
Ah, fulljid.
Zash
woot
Ge0rG
Zash: that should only be an issue if the bot adds timestamp to everything
pep.
returns empty nonetheless..
pep.
But I see code for it
Ge0rG
So it will artificially delay its responses to be more human like, but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes?
Ge0rG
And yes, I hate it indeed
vanitasvitae
> but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes?
This is especially annoying if you are on mobile
pep.
Well I just fixed it. Let's awit for Alex to merge it :)✎