XSF Discussion - 2020-02-25

  1. raghavgururajan has left

  2. andy has left

  3. raghavgururajan has joined

  4. raghavgururajan has left

  5. Neustradamus has joined

  6. raghavgururajan has joined

  7. Neustradamus has left

  8. Neustradamus has joined

  9. Neustradamus has left

  10. raghavgururajan has left

  11. calvin has left

  12. raghavgururajan has joined

  13. Neustradamus has joined

  14. Neustradamus has left

  15. raghavgururajan has left

  16. Alex__ has left

  17. karoshi has left

  18. pdurbin has left

  19. pdurbin has joined

  20. raghavgururajan has joined

  21. pdurbin has left

  22. raghavgururajan has left

  23. raghavgururajan has joined

  24. raghavgururajan has left

  25. raghavgururajan has joined

  26. calvin has joined

  27. arc has left

  28. arc has joined

  29. mukt2 has joined

  30. david has left

  31. debacle has left

  32. david has joined

  33. mukt2 has left

  34. lovetox has left

  35. wurstsalat has left

  36. arc has left

  37. arc has joined

  38. lovetox has joined

  39. arc has left

  40. arc has joined

  41. pdurbin has joined

  42. Yagiza has joined

  43. lovetox has left

  44. arc has left

  45. arc has joined

  46. pdurbin has left

  47. Marc has left

  48. vanitasvitae has left

  49. lskdjf has left

  50. vanitasvitae has joined

  51. arc has left

  52. adiaholic has left

  53. adiaholic has joined

  54. calvin has left

  55. pdurbin has joined

  56. mukt2 has joined

  57. adiaholic has left

  58. adiaholic has joined

  59. mukt2 has left

  60. serge90 has left

  61. serge90 has joined

  62. mukt2 has joined

  63. lovetox has joined

  64. andy has joined

  65. winfried has left

  66. winfried has joined

  67. mukt2 has left

  68. mukt2 has joined

  69. lorddavidiii has joined

  70. mimi89999 has left

  71. mimi89999 has joined

  72. pdurbin has left

  73. debxwoody has joined

  74. pdurbin has joined

  75. raghavgururajan has left

  76. mukt2 has left

  77. raghavgururajan has joined

  78. raghavgururajan has left

  79. Tobias has joined

  80. mukt2 has joined

  81. Nekit has left

  82. wurstsalat has joined

  83. Nekit has joined

  84. mukt2 has left

  85. mukt2 has joined

  86. Marc has joined

  87. karoshi has joined

  88. lorddavidiii has left

  89. lorddavidiii has joined

  90. lorddavidiii has left

  91. pdurbin has left

  92. lorddavidiii has joined

  93. lorddavidiii has left

  94. pdurbin has joined

  95. lorddavidiii has joined

  96. lorddavidiii has left

  97. lorddavidiii has joined

  98. lorddavidiii has left

  99. emus has joined

  100. mimi89999 has left

  101. mimi89999 has joined

  102. raghavgururajan has joined

  103. lorddavidiii has joined

  104. winfried has left

  105. winfried has joined

  106. debxwoody has left

  107. mukt2 has left

  108. mukt2 has joined

  109. debxwoody has joined

  110. debxwoody has left

  111. lorddavidiii has left

  112. lorddavidiii has joined

  113. Marc has left

  114. mukt2 has left

  115. Marc has joined

  116. Shell has joined

  117. Steve Kille has left

  118. Steve Kille has joined

  119. Shell has left

  120. Shell has joined

  121. Shell has left

  122. Shell has joined

  123. eevvoor has joined

  124. Shell has left

  125. Shell has joined

  126. andrey.g has left

  127. Shell has left

  128. Shell has joined

  129. mukt2 has joined

  130. mukt2 has left

  131. mukt2 has joined

  132. LNJ has joined

  133. eevvoor has left

  134. eevvoor has joined

  135. mukt2 has left

  136. andrey.g has joined

  137. eevvoor has left

  138. Dele Olajide has joined

  139. mukt2 has joined

  140. adiaholic has left

  141. adiaholic has joined

  142. Alex__ has joined

  143. krauq has left

  144. krauq has joined

  145. debacle has joined

  146. mukt2 has left

  147. pdurbin has left

  148. eevvoor has joined

  149. marc has joined

  150. eevvoor has left

  151. Alex__ has left

  152. Shell has left

  153. mukt2 has joined

  154. winfried has left

  155. winfried has joined

  156. winfried has left

  157. winfried has joined

  158. mukt2 has left

  159. winfried has left

  160. winfried has joined

  161. raghavgururajan has left

  162. mukt2 has joined

  163. eevvoor has joined

  164. Alex__ has joined

  165. emus has left

  166. mukt2 has left

  167. mukt2 has joined

  168. emus has joined

  169. karoshi has left

  170. karoshi has joined

  171. marc has left

  172. eevvoor has left

  173. mukt2 has left

  174. Alex__ has left

  175. lorddavidiii has left

  176. Shell has joined

  177. lorddavidiii has joined

  178. adiaholic has left

  179. adiaholic has joined

  180. lorddavidiii has left

  181. lorddavidiii has joined

  182. lorddavidiii has left

  183. lorddavidiii has joined

  184. Shell has left

  185. Shell has joined

  186. lorddavidiii has left

  187. mukt2 has joined

  188. lorddavidiii has joined

  189. debacle has left

  190. Shell has left

  191. Shell has joined

  192. lorddavidiii has left

  193. lorddavidiii has joined

  194. lorddavidiii has left

  195. mukt2 has left

  196. lorddavidiii has joined

  197. mukt2 has joined

  198. LNJ has left

  199. larma has left

  200. adiaholic has left

  201. adiaholic has joined

  202. waqas has left

  203. mukt2 has left

  204. Nekit has left

  205. larma has joined

  206. pdurbin has joined

  207. paul has left

  208. Nekit has joined

  209. Shell has left

  210. Shell has joined

  211. Shell has left

  212. Shell has joined

  213. paul has joined

  214. pdurbin has left

  215. lorddavidiii has left

  216. lskdjf has joined

  217. lorddavidiii has joined

  218. lskdjf has left

  219. lskdjf has joined

  220. paul has left

  221. paul has joined

  222. debacle has joined

  223. lorddavidiii has left

  224. Shell has left

  225. Shell has joined

  226. lorddavidiii has joined

  227. mukt2 has joined

  228. paul has left

  229. lorddavidiii has left

  230. lorddavidiii has joined

  231. Shell has left

  232. Shell has joined

  233. marc has joined

  234. mukt2 has left

  235. lorddavidiii has left

  236. Dele Olajide has left

  237. Dele Olajide has joined

  238. lorddavidiii has joined

  239. Shell has left

  240. Shell has joined

  241. MattJ

    How do client devs feel about implementing references of type=mention?

  242. Kev

    Feel in what sense?

  243. MattJ

    Why does (afaict) only a single client support it right now?

  244. Shell has left

  245. Shell has joined

  246. Kev

    I think it's particularly useful for servers too, when generating notifications.

  247. MattJ

    Right, I'm involved in such a project

  248. Kev

    But I'm intending Swift does them when we get to it.

  249. MattJ

    But if you use most XMPP clients with this server, no notifications are generated

  250. jonas’

    MattJ, I don’t feel particularly enthusiastic about implementing anything References until my comments from three years ago are at least addressed

  251. 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")

  252. jonas’

    oh, just two years: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2018-March/034559.html

  253. MattJ

    Is it related to character counting? or something else?

  254. MattJ

    I thought the character counting stuff reached some kind of consensus

  255. paul has joined

  256. paul has left

  257. MattJ

    and that was the primary blocker in my mind

  258. 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.

  259. paul has joined

  260. Kev

    MattJ: Jonas also (sensibly) wanted extensible reference types (mentions etc.).

  261. MattJ

    Kev, you mean "as well as text scanning"?

  262. Kev

    MattJ: I mean as well as the receiving client generating notifications based on something having put mentions in.

  263. 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?"

  264. Shell has left

  265. Shell has joined

  266. MattJ

    Their current stance is "Why don't XMPP clients support mentions? The ecosystem seems terrible"

  267. Kev

    I don't think I'm suggesting that, am I?

  268. adiaholic has left

  269. adiaholic has joined

  270. Kev

    I'm not intentionally doing so, at least!

  271. Zash

    What's this then MattJ ?

  272. MattJ

    Zash, only works if I'm online and connected, and their primary client is a web app

  273. MattJ

    and I don't want to use it, but I can't notify people when I send them a message :)

  274. MattJ

    (and this isn't just about me - they /want/ to say they support arbitrary XMPP clients)

  275. MattJ

    But if they advertise that as a feature, people will wonder why nobody answers them when they mention them

  276. DebXWoody has left

  277. Ge0rG has left

  278. DebXWoody has joined

  279. Ge0rG has joined

  280. Shell has left

  281. Shell has joined

  282. mukt2 has joined

  283. Zash

    Cry and implement some server-side heuristics? Like only looking for nicknames at the start of lines

  284. Dele Olajide has left

  285. Dele Olajide has joined

  286. Shell has left

  287. Shell has joined

  288. Shell has left

  289. LNJ has joined

  290. Shell has joined

  291. adiaholic has left

  292. adiaholic has joined

  293. adiaholic has left

  294. adiaholic has joined

  295. lorddavidiii has left

  296. lorddavidiii has joined

  297. calvin has joined

  298. Shell has left

  299. Shell has joined

  300. pdurbin has joined

  301. DebXWoody has left

  302. Shell has left

  303. Shell has joined

  304. mimi89999 has left

  305. mimi89999 has joined

  306. calvin has left

  307. DebXWoody has joined

  308. goffi has joined

  309. Shell has left

  310. winfried has left

  311. winfried has joined

  312. pdurbin has left

  313. Shell has joined

  314. mukt2 has left

  315. Shell has left

  316. Shell has joined

  317. mukt2 has joined

  318. debxwoody has joined

  319. mukt2 has left

  320. mukt2 has joined

  321. Alex

    I have started memberbot for collection votes on our current Q1-2020 application period

  322. adiaholic has left

  323. winfried has left

  324. winfried has joined

  325. Shell has left

  326. Shell has joined

  327. Neustradamus has joined

  328. Jeybe has joined

  329. Jeybe

    Hey all. What XEP does a Client / Server need to support for sending and receiving if a message was read?

  330. Jeybe

    Is this done within XEP-0085: Chat State Notifications or is there something seperate / additional?

  331. calvin has joined

  332. Wojtek has joined

  333. jonas’

    Jeybe, XEP-0184 (Message Receipts)

  334. Jeybe

    Isn't that just a delivery receipt and no info about whether a message was read or not?

  335. Jeybe

    Or do I get that wrong

  336. pep.

    Alex, thanks

  337. Kev

    Jeybe: You're correct. People typically use 333 for that.

  338. Kev


  339. jubalh has left

  340. jubalh has joined

  341. calvin has left

  342. calvin has joined

  343. 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?

  344. pep.

    Deferred doesn't especially mean unfinished

  345. pep.

    When do we kill this state again :x

  346. Kev

    Jeybe: That's a reasonable approximation of a description, yes :)

  347. Jeybe

    Kev: Ok, thanks

  348. Douglas Terabyte has left

  349. Douglas Terabyte has joined

  350. mukt2 has left

  351. Douglas Terabyte has left

  352. Douglas Terabyte has joined

  353. Max has left

  354. jubalh has left

  355. jubalh has joined

  356. Max has joined

  357. Shell has left

  358. jonas’

    Jeybe: sorry, I misread your message and thought you wrote "received" instead of read

  359. calvin has left

  360. Marc has left

  361. Marc has joined

  362. Guus

    memberbot is online for member applications for Q1. If you read this, you might as well cast your votes now. 🙂

  363. jonas’

    emus: re https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Edward_Maurer_Application_2020

  364. jonas’

    you say you work in the wind power industry, yet you claim no company affiliation

  365. jonas’

    I don't think that's right

  366. emus

    The company uses.....Skype f B. 😃🎉🎊

  367. jonas’

    I'm not sure that matters

  368. emus

    I`m saying I apply as a private person.

  369. jonas’

    my understanding is that we have limits on the share of members per company

  370. Kev


  371. emus

    What do expect from me?

  372. jonas’

    I think you can only apply as individual in general

  373. emus

    Ehm, so I did?

  374. jonas’

    what I'm saying is that you're still affiliated with your employer and need to say so

  375. jonas’

    I *think*

  376. jonas’

    that's at least how I understand the rules and how I wrote my own application

  377. 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.

  378. goffi has left

  379. Guus

    Bylaws have the details, if you're interested.

  380. 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.

  381. pep.

    "Note that this is not limited to employment" interesting

  382. jonas’

    I also disclosed my university when I was still a student

  383. jonas’

    (for that reason)

  384. 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.

  385. fippo

    there goes the evil plan to hire a lot of contractors and take over the xsf...

  386. pep.

    fippo, yeah, the bylaws saw you coming!!

  387. Kev

    I'm sure you have backup evil plans.

  388. 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....

  389. calvin has joined

  390. 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.

  391. 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....

  392. 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

  393. adiaholic has joined

  394. 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.

  395. 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

  396. emus

    Im a working student...

  397. emus

    No, then I refuse my application.

  398. jonas’

    emus: I'm not particularly fond of those rules either. But I understand that they are useful to keep the XSF independent.

  399. pep.

    I understand the XSF has to know about it, I still don't understand why this has to be made public

  400. lorddavidiii has left

  401. jonas’

    emus: on the bright side, nothing of what you stated in your application strictly requires membership

  402. lorddavidiii has joined

  403. jonas’

    pep.: maybe because nobody asked for it to be private yet? sounds like a board topic to fix that.

  404. mukt2 has joined

  405. emus

    I got asked to apply, because some appeciated what I did 🤷‍♂️ So I said, yes is fine

  406. Zash

    I think we've mentioned that it's probably doable to have only the Secretary know

  407. 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

  408. 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

  409. emus

    I can tell privately where work to someone responsible, but I would not like to put it online.

  410. jonas’

    pep.: to be honest, I don't like this requirement either. It did put me off back then for a moment.

  411. pep.

    Note that this topic has come up every last membership vote I think

  412. jonas’

    so I'd support a motion for defining a way to declare affiliations privately

  413. 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.

  414. jonas’

    did it? I only recall the anonymity thing

  415. pep.

    Well this kind of mitigates the anonymity issue

  416. pep.

    Anonymity is not an on/off switch as you know :)

  417. jonas’

    does it?

  418. Ge0rG

    I still think that for a public standards organizations, it's important to have public information about the members and their affiliations

  419. emus

    Actually I dropped, saying in which industry I work, to even more say that this has no relation 😅

  420. pep.

    emus, I'm sorry but that doesn't help :/

  421. Guus

    I'm with Ge0rG

  422. pep.

    I'm not

  423. 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.

  424. emus

    But does everyone here dropped exactly where their work or study?

  425. Ge0rG

    lskdjf: there is no requirement to be a member for contributing to XEPs

  426. jonas’

    emus: check the applications

  427. 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

  428. pep.

    Ge0rG, that's diverting

  429. lskdjf

    Ge0rG, I'm aware of that. What's your point?

  430. emus

    > emus: check the applications What exactly?

  431. 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

  432. Ge0rG

    lskdjf: membership is responsible for voting people into public positions, so I think the transparency requirements extend here

  433. 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

  434. pep.

    members don't have to submit XEPs either

  435. lskdjf

    > though I *do* wonder how one would submit a XEP pseudonomously jonas’ it's not allowed according to ... xep 001 or so

  436. jonas’

    > What exactly? emus, just open them and you'll see that people disclose their employer

  437. adiaholic has left

  438. jonas’

    it's on my user page for example

  439. winfried has left

  440. winfried has joined

  441. emus

    Will check again, but havent recognised that as a mandatory point

  442. emus

    also not that everyone was telling

  443. 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.

  444. Guus

    It is mandatory. Check the bylaws. If not everyone included the information, that was an omission in their application.

  445. marc has left

  446. jonas’

    reading the bylaws of the organization you're trying to join seems like a good idea either way

  447. emus

    Okay guys, lets making simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.

  448. pep.

    jonas’, so yeah I can bring that to board, but it's likely to get shot down :)

  449. Ge0rG

    lskdjf: I'm aware of that. What's your point?

  450. emus

    Okay guys, lets make itsimple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.

  451. emus

    Okay guys, lets make it simple: I refuse. Is fine and not important any way.

  452. jonas’

    Alex, cc, see emus message above

  453. lskdjf

    Ge0rG, 😛 well, I was drawing an analogy.

  454. pep.

    emus, sorry, and thanks :)

  455. emus

    > emus, sorry, and thanks :) No problem

  456. pep.

    Also why I think the XSF won't change as long as we don't let new people like this in.

  457. emus

    XMPP wondering why no one gives a shit about it.... 🤔

  458. 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.

  459. emus


  460. emus

    That meant to be in the wrong chat

  461. Guus


  462. Guus

    we didn't even start to debate this.

  463. Guus

    but, sure. We're not open to change, apparently.

  464. Ge0rG

    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.

  465. emus

    Didn`t meant to bother you procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway

  466. mukt2 has left

  467. emus

    Didn`t meant to bother your procedures, but if I would have known before, I wouldnt have applied anyway

  468. Ge0rG

    I'm pretty sure that it's possible to ask Board for a change to these rules without being a member, though.

  469. pep.

    But it's not possible to vote

  470. marc has joined

  471. Guus

    emus: that's on you. We have very public records and bylaws.

  472. Guus

    don't blame us for not doing your homework.

  473. 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

  474. winfried has left

  475. winfried has joined

  476. lskdjf has left

  477. Guus

    I'm going to drop out of this conversation. It is ticking a nerve, which doesn't help me being a useful participant.

  478. 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

  479. pep.

    (yes yes we can all PR)

  480. winfried has left

  481. winfried has joined

  482. Daniel

    Why is this suddenly coming up?

  483. 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.

  484. Ge0rG

    Daniel: because it's election time

  485. 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

  486. Daniel

    Yes. But it was never a big topic before

  487. pep.

    it has

  488. pep.

    multiple times

  489. Ge0rG

    Daniel: anonymous participation has been a topic before, some times.

  490. Daniel

    Yeah. I was more referring to the affiliations part

  491. calvin has left

  492. emus

    But its not anonymous anymore actually

  493. pep.

    This is not full anonymity towards the XSF mind

  494. emus

    once I put my name

  495. jonas’


  496. pep.


  497. Daniel

    Tbh I'm not really sure what affiliation means in the context of my being self employed

  498. pep.

    You have to disclose every single one of your clients!

  499. pep.


  500. emus


  501. pep.

    But hmm, tbh, I think that's what "Note that this is not limited to employment" means

  502. pdurbin has joined

  503. Daniel

    I'm sure that at least 50 percent of my customers aren't happy with me doing that

  504. pep.

    I'm sure of that :)

  505. adiaholic has joined

  506. littlesmiley has joined

  507. Kev

    The "not company" thing is because e.g. most OSS projects aren't company-based within XMPP.

  508. pdurbin has left

  509. Kev

    But if 30 people working for different companies, all of whom were working on Swift were to apply, the XSF should care.

  510. 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...

  511. mukt2 has joined

  512. 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.

  513. 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

  514. littlesmiley has left

  515. 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.

  516. debxwoody has left

  517. neshtaxmpp has left

  518. jubalh has left

  519. jubalh has joined

  520. winfried has left

  521. winfried has joined

  522. 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"

  523. 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"

  524. littlesmiley has joined

  525. adiaholic has left

  526. winfried has left

  527. winfried has joined

  528. adiaholic has joined

  529. j.r has left

  530. eevvoor has joined

  531. mukt2 has left

  532. mukt2 has joined

  533. goffi has joined

  534. lorddavidiii has left

  535. winfried has left

  536. winfried has joined

  537. lorddavidiii has joined

  538. winfried has left

  539. winfried has joined

  540. 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

  541. lorddavidiii has left

  542. jonas’

    Alex, emus retracted the application

  543. mukt2 has left

  544. lorddavidiii has joined

  545. Alex

    it is still on the Wiki, don't think we defined somewhere on how to retract an application ;-)

  546. mukt2 has joined

  547. 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

  548. 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

  549. emus

    as said

  550. emus

    I am.okay with other option

  551. adiaholic has left

  552. 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

  553. jubalh has left

  554. jubalh has joined

  555. j.r has joined

  556. 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.

  557. ralphm

    The whole idea behind it is just that we want to prevent companies to be overrepresented in our membership.

  558. ralphm


  559. MattJ

    I totally get the idea behind it

  560. MattJ

    But from the day it was first proposed I said I didn't see how it would actually work

  561. MattJ

    I've never listed anything and nobody has ever complained :)

  562. pep.

    It doesn't seem to be applied very much anyway

  563. 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.

  564. moparisthebest

    Nothing stops anyone from just lying, or simply not putting anything, apparently :)

  565. larma

    The assumption seems to be that everyone would be so kind to mention company info if it was relevant

  566. littlesmiley has left

  567. littlesmiley has joined

  568. pep.

    moparisthebest, yeah that's true of every info you give anyway :)

  569. ralphm

    I think self-employed is totally fine.

  570. mukt2 has left

  571. 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?

  572. ralphm

    Lies will be caught up with, I don't see a problem.

  573. ralphm

    MattJ, we'd talk about it

  574. MattJ

    and it would be my fault if I forgot to mention it?

  575. neshtaxmpp has joined

  576. larma

    MattJ, are you representing their interest when making use of your XSF membership rights? If no, then it doesn't matter

  577. MattJ

    Does it specify anywhere that I have to update the XSF if my status with a company changes between applications?

  578. jonas’

    if my employer enters a three month contract to build infrastructure for, say, NATO messaging, would I have to disclose that?

  579. winfried has left

  580. winfried has joined

  581. MattJ

    and how do I know which companies I need to notify the XSF about, and which I don't?

  582. MattJ

    Obviously I've been around a while and could guess a few, but it seems pretty arbitrary

  583. 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)?

  584. 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

  585. pep.

    Of some putting their affiliations and some not? And asking every new member to? :p

  586. 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?

  587. calvin has joined

  588. ralphm

    MattJ: your last statement is my vantage point

  589. pep.

    I'm curious what you think is the status quo though

  590. mukt2 has joined

  591. MattJ

    pep., you just summed it up :)

  592. pep.

    I don't like this

  593. pep.

    Why would we force it on new members while not on others

  594. MattJ

    We historically haven't forced it

  595. pep.

    Seems pretty random to me

  596. david has left

  597. 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.

  598. MattJ

    We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it

  599. 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.

  600. Ge0rG

    If we don't strictly enforce this rule, how are we supposed to prevent being hijacked?

  601. MattJ

    Ge0rG, it beats not having a rule and then not being able to enforce it when you need to

  602. 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?

  603. david has joined

  604. pep.

    emus, what MattJ said.

  605. Ge0rG

    MattJ: okay, I can see that.

  606. calvin has left

  607. emus

    If you agree, I can tell Alex, or anyone else privately, as long that kept privately

  608. pep.

    I also think it's a worthwile rule to have. I'm happy to rework the implementation

  609. littlesmiley has left

  610. littlesmiley has joined

  611. Ge0rG

    So maybe somebody should change XEP-0345 into "affiliations can be made public, and must be communicated to the Secretary otherwise"

  612. emus

    (I also understand that XSF fears to get hijacked of course)

  613. pep.

    Ge0rG, 345 doesn't actually say this information has to be public does it?

  614. pep.

    ah it does

  615. pep.

    Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assume in the document

  616. alameyo has left

  617. alameyo has joined

  618. pep.

    Only in one place, Security Considerations. It just seems to be assumed in the document

  619. Ge0rG

    pep.: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0345.html#mandatory

  620. larma

    Ge0rG, it says applicants must provide, not to whom

  621. pep.

    That doesn't say public. It talks about giving info to the Secretary and allowing members to vote

  622. Ge0rG

    > As a secondary purpose, it also allows the XSF members to make an informed decision when voting to accept applications

  623. pep.


  624. Jeybe has left

  625. Ge0rG

    that implies that members will see this.

  626. pep.


  627. pep.

    That's already better than "On a public wiki"

  628. Ge0rG

    and §3 says it has to be in the wiki

  629. Ge0rG

    pep.: I'm sure you can provide a better wording as a PR :D

  630. pep.

    I'm working on it

  631. 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'.

  632. littlesmiley has left

  633. littlesmiley has joined

  634. jonas’

    15:51:07 MattJ> We request it, I've never seen anyone flag an application that didn't have it I did, today.

  635. littlesmiley has left

  636. littlesmiley has joined

  637. MattJ

    I didn't scroll back that far, I guess :)

  638. MattJ

    I'm definitely against picking on random people

  639. 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

  640. 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

  641. jonas’

    I simply assumed it was an oversight

  642. 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)

  643. larma

    jonas’, he can keep tab on the 15% even without getting company names 😉

  644. littlesmiley has left

  645. littlesmiley has joined

  646. 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 ;)

  647. ralphm

    Yes, until we only have 8 members, which is yet another problem.

  648. 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.

  649. serge90 has left

  650. adiaholic has joined

  651. 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.

  652. 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.

  653. 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?)

  654. Marc has left

  655. Marc has joined

  656. littlesmiley has left

  657. littlesmiley has joined

  658. adiaholic has left

  659. Zash

    Organizational meta-discussions?

  660. Alex

    @emus exposed his employer to me. So I have it in my records

  661. j.r has left

  662. adiaholic has joined

  663. 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"

  664. 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

  665. eevvoor has left

  666. serge90 has joined

  667. adiaholic has left

  668. mukt2 has left

  669. eevvoor has joined

  670. j.r has joined

  671. adiaholic has joined

  672. eevvoor has left

  673. mukt2 has joined

  674. littlesmiley has left

  675. Jeybe has joined

  676. winfried has left

  677. winfried has joined

  678. neshtaxmpp has left

  679. matkor has left

  680. matkor has joined

  681. mukt2 has left

  682. debacle has left

  683. winfried has left

  684. winfried has joined

  685. Jeybe has left

  686. mukt2 has joined

  687. Jeybe has joined

  688. vanitasvitae never disclosed their job either :P

  689. vanitasvitae

    Am I even real? 😱

  690. Zash

    Are birds real?

  691. pep.

    I only see pixels

  692. jonas’

    I see fragged people

  693. Ge0rG

    I don't even see the pixels. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead.

  694. jonas’

    damn, that was the better reference

  695. pdurbin has joined

  696. jonas’

    just proves that it’s been too long since I saw The Matrix

  697. 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?

  698. neshtaxmpp has joined

  699. winfried has left

  700. winfried has joined

  701. winfried has left

  702. winfried has joined

  703. jonas’

    "just do it"

  704. Ge0rG

    said the person who just did it.

  705. jonas’


  706. jonas’

    switching hats all the time sure does get confusing

  707. Ge0rG

    * jonas’ puts on his wizard hat and robe.

  708. jonas’

    that’s only on friday nights.

  709. jonas’

    and also not a wizard, actually

  710. Ge0rG

    a lizard, then?

  711. vanitasvitae

    Level 7 Valor Bard

  712. Steve Kille has left

  713. neshtaxmpp has left

  714. pdurbin has left

  715. Steve Kille has joined

  716. DebXWoody has left

  717. emus

    > vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P Omg... tbh I read a few application but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵

  718. emus

    > vantiasvitae never disclosed their job either :P Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵

  719. DebXWoody has joined

  720. debacle has joined

  721. Zash

    > The namespace governing this protocol is "http://jabber.org/protocol/commands" (hereafter referred to as x-commands). What the x-?

  722. jonas’

    legacy, probably

  723. Zash

    Hm, can't well-known commands take the dataform in the first step?

  724. eevvoor has joined

  725. vanitasvitae

    > Omg... tbh I read a few applications but also yours to get some inspiration... 🐵 Don't blame me for this now :P

  726. Nekit has left

  727. mukt2 has left

  728. marc

    Ge0rG: what are our options?

  729. mukt2 has joined

  730. emus

    > Don't blame me for this now :P Everything is your fault!!!1! 😉

  731. neshtaxmpp has joined

  732. winfried has left

  733. 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

  734. winfried has joined

  735. Jeybe has left

  736. jonas’

    does anyone know how a Last Call email for a Procedural XEP should look like?

  737. jonas’

    otherwise I’m going to cook something up

  738. jonas’

    (the old tooling did not support this case, neither does the new)

  739. Jeybe has joined

  740. marc

    Looks like shit on mobile, I'll read it later

  741. Ge0rG

    marc: yeah :/

  742. jonas’


  743. jonas’

    man, I should step back from writing emails for today

  744. winfried has left

  745. winfried has joined

  746. Zash

    Oof, my inbox

  747. jonas’

    > URL: http://localhost:8080/extensions/xep-0429.html

  748. jonas’

    spot the error ;)

  749. Ge0rG

    ouch ;)

  750. Zash


  751. Zash

    jonas’, wait what, vcard4 isn't PEP-backed already?

  752. winfried has left

  753. winfried has joined

  754. adiaholic has left

  755. adiaholic has joined

  756. jonas’

    Zash, I checked it, and it didn’t look as if it was

  757. jonas’

    <iq from='samizzi@cisco.com/foo' id='bx81v356' to='stpeter@jabber.org' type='get'> <vcard xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0'/> </iq>

  758. jonas’

    ``` <iq from='samizzi@cisco.com/foo' id='bx81v356' to='stpeter@jabber.org' type='get'> <vcard xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0'/> </iq> ```

  759. jonas’

    that’s not PEP to me

  760. jonas’

    it optionally uses PEP events for update notifications

  761. Zash

    It was PEP-only before, then that was added so that it would work in MUC ... IIRC

  762. jonas’

    but it isn’t strictly a PEP node

  763. Marc has left

  764. Syndace has left

  765. Jeybe has left

  766. Syndace has joined

  767. Zash

    mod_vcard4 in Prosody is just a thin layer over the corresponding PEP node.

  768. Syndace has left

  769. Syndace has joined

  770. Marc has joined

  771. Zash

    and mod_vcard_legacy which implements 0398 is also a (not so thin) layer over a bunch of PEP nodes

  772. Zash

    And as I'm trying to figure out how to write, it does respect the individual permission settings of those nodes.

  773. Jeybe has joined

  774. jonas’

    you may want to add that to the thread then.

  775. jonas’

    because that’s not what the spec says currently ;)

  776. Syndace has left

  777. Marc has left

  778. Marc has joined

  779. jonas’

    (and I generally prefer your behaviour)

  780. jonas’

    (and I generally prefer your implementation’s behaviour)

  781. Zash

    That reply is exactly what I'm trying to compose

  782. Syndace has joined

  783. jonas’


  784. 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

  785. jonas’

    yeah, that’s the kind of stuff I was thinking about

  786. emus has left

  787. Zash

    There's a thread on 0292 somewhere btw

  788. emus has joined

  789. 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

  790. jonas’

    sounds to me as if The Editor™ should re-issue the (expired) LC for '292

  791. marc

    Ge0rG, I agree with Daniel and I would prefer to use SASL2 even though I'm not familar with SASL2 at all atm

  792. Ge0rG

    marc: SASL2 was introduced in March 2017, and then... nothing happened

  793. Daniel

    With me?

  794. Daniel

    Thank you.

  795. Daniel

    On what?

  796. Ge0rG

    Daniel: re XEP-0401

  797. winfried has left

  798. winfried has joined

  799. Ge0rG

    marc: my reasons to change 0401 were not to make it perfect but to make it easy to integrate today

  800. marc

    Ge0rG, I know but "we" have lots of problem today because "we" did ugly hacks in the past, no?

  801. marc


  802. david has left

  803. Zash

    It's a hack but there's an Actual Product that uses it, so there's that

  804. Ge0rG

    marc: yes, but this is a minor hack on top of an existing hack

  805. marc

    I used data forms in the first place because i though it's the best solution

  806. marc

    now it seems SASL2 is the "best" solution

  807. Zash

    SASL2 for the future! :)

  808. winfried has left

  809. winfried has joined

  810. waqas has joined

  811. 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

  812. Zash

    too late

  813. marc

    tbh, I don't know how far away we are from SASL2 :)

  814. marc

    Zash, hm?

  815. Ge0rG

    marc: not so much, because SASL2 will be a nice and clean solution to many problems, including token authentication

  816. Zash

    marc: I mean there are implementations already (of 0401 etc)

  817. marc

    Ge0rG, yep, but you need backwards compability

  818. marc


  819. Ge0rG

    marc: yes, but you'll also need backward compat between SASL2 and IBR, between SASL2 and normal login, etc

  820. marc

    Zash, yep, a spec cannot step people from implementing something else ;)

  821. marc

    Ge0rG, token if SASL2, no token otherwise? :)

  822. Zash

    I do have some SASL2 code stewing fwiw

  823. Ge0rG

    marc: no - token via SALS2 or token via IQ if no SASL22

  824. Zash

    Need ... a client to test with

  825. Dele Olajide has left

  826. 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

  827. Zash


  828. marc

    Zash, SASL2 code for prosody?

  829. Zash


  830. Dele Olajide has joined

  831. marc

    Daniel, how much effort is it to implement SASL2 in Conversations?

  832. 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

  833. marc

    Ge0rG, 401 is not important enough for ugly hacks IMO

  834. Daniel

    marc: I don't know a lot about sasl 2 to say. Probably not a lot

  835. Ge0rG

    marc: if it's not important, you can accept the ugly hack

  836. marc

    432 sounds like a joke from fefe's blog ^^

  837. 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

  838. Ge0rG

    marc: however, I'm convinced that we need easy user onboarding and that 0401 is an important step in that direction

  839. marc

    Zash, can you give me the link to your SASL2 branch?

  840. Ge0rG

    marc: ask MattJ about the experience with 0401 at last FOSDEM

  841. mukt2 has left

  842. marc

    Ge0rG, I already had a working implementation with ejabberd and Conversations, I know that it is nice

  843. marc

    But I don't want to pollute the protocol with more ugly hacks

  844. jonas’

    Zash, I could probably look into implementing SASL2 in aioxmpp if you hand me a server to test with

  845. Ge0rG

    marc: you had an implementation of 0401 before my change?

  846. marc

    jonas’, +1

  847. marc

    Ge0rG, yes?

  848. Ge0rG

    marc: you need to be more public about your achievements.

  849. marc

    Ge0rG, IIRC I posted a screencast ;)

  850. Ge0rG

    marc: ...to where?

  851. marc

    Ge0rG, even a Gajim implementation!!1!

  852. marc

    here or in the Conversations group chat

  853. Ge0rG

    marc: that's not adequate.

  854. Ge0rG

    People are not reading chat-logs

  855. marc

    Ge0rG, I'm pretty sure you read it Ôo

  856. 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

  857. Ge0rG

    marc: maybe I'm just getting old

  858. marc

    Ge0rG, If not I'm very sorry

  859. Ge0rG

    marc: what's the URL?

  860. Ge0rG

    Maybe I'll remember when I see it?

  861. Ge0rG

    Or maybe I should just go offline and become a potato farmer

  862. jonas’

    s/potato/tomato/ #louiz

  863. marc

    It's not online anymore because I reinstalled my infrastructure but let me see if I can find it

  864. Yagiza has left

  865. 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/

  866. Wojtek has left

  867. LNJ has left

  868. LNJ has joined

  869. marc

    Ge0rG, found it

  870. winfried has left

  871. winfried has joined

  872. mukt2 has joined

  873. marc

    Ge0rG, https://blog.zapb.de/assets/xmpp-invite.webm

  874. marc

    Ge0rG, 1142496 Nov 16 2017 xmpp-invite.webm

  875. emus has left

  876. winfried has left

  877. winfried has joined

  878. Ge0rG

    marc: okay, I've seen that video back in 2017. Where's the code?

  879. marc

    Ge0rG, somewhere on my notebook / server

  880. Ge0rG

    marc: so it never got published?

  881. marc

    ejabberd implementation got stuck because of an xml element with the same synatx whatever but two different meanings

  882. mukt2 has left

  883. marc

    this was not possible in ejabberd I was told by zinid

  884. Ge0rG


  885. marc

    Ge0rG, I don't remember the details but some element used in 401 and PARS had the same name but different meaning

  886. lorddavidiii has left

  887. Ge0rG

    the token element?

  888. marc

    and this couldn't be implemented in ejabberd

  889. marc

    maybe, yes

  890. adiaholic has left

  891. adiaholic has joined

  892. lorddavidiii has joined

  893. Ge0rG

    marc: did you submit anything to Conversations or Gajim?

  894. Ge0rG

    ..or even tell the developers?

  895. Ge0rG

    Sorry, I'm not trying to offend you, I'm just sad.

  896. mukt2 has joined

  897. marc

    Daniel was aware of it

  898. winfried has left

  899. winfried has joined

  900. marc

    The Gajim dudes I don't know

  901. eevvoor has left

  902. david has joined

  903. marc

    Ge0rG, sorry

  904. marc

    Zash, what about your SASL2 code?

  905. pdurbin has joined

  906. winfried has left

  907. winfried has joined

  908. Douglas Terabyte has left

  909. winfried has left

  910. winfried has joined

  911. pdurbin has left

  912. littlesmiley has joined

  913. Zash

    Food takes priority

  914. eevvoor has joined

  915. Dele Olajide has left

  916. Dele Olajide has joined

  917. Dele Olajide has left

  918. Half-Shot[m] has left

  919. winfried has left

  920. winfried has joined

  921. Half-Shot[m] has joined

  922. mukt2 has left

  923. Marc has left

  924. Syndace has left

  925. Marc has joined

  926. Syndace has joined

  927. Syndace has left

  928. Marc has left

  929. Syndace has joined

  930. Marc has joined

  931. Zash

    marc, jonas’: https://modules.prosody.im/mod_sasl2.html

  932. emus has joined

  933. Marc has left

  934. Marc has joined

  935. marc

    Zash, wow, not very complex

  936. mukt2 has joined

  937. Zash

    SASL itself isn't that complicated

  938. Marc has left

  939. Syndace has left

  940. Zash

    And the logic is mostly handled elsewhere by the same stuff that handles SASL1

  941. Zash

    That code is just mapping it to the new wire protocol

  942. Zash

    And notably doesn't do any of the fancy stuff SASL2 is meant to allow

  943. Marc has joined

  944. Syndace has joined

  945. LNJ has left

  946. LNJ has joined

  947. eevvoor has left

  948. Marc has left

  949. Syndace has left

  950. Marc has joined

  951. Syndace has joined

  952. Zash

    jonas’, sent that vcard compat reply. I hope I finished it.

  953. marc

    Like tasks?

  954. jonas’

    Zash, I know that feel

  955. jonas’

    Zash, does vcard4 not contain an avatar?

  956. Zash

    It can, but why would we when we have '84?

  957. Zash

    Or what do you mean?

  958. Douglas Terabyte has joined

  959. Zash

    Avatars are separated out and not included stored in the vcard4 PEP node by the Prosody module.

  960. Zash

    minus one word

  961. Zash

    the post-food slowness

  962. !XSF_Martin has left

  963. jonas’

    Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar?

  964. !XSF_Martin has joined

  965. jonas’

    Zash, so when a client wants the "full" vcard4, it has to query vcard4 + avatar, separately?

  966. Zash


  967. Zash


  968. jonas’

    just for my understanding

  969. Zash

    You probably had the avatar already to show in the contact list or somesuch.

  970. jonas’

    Zash, I was asking from a permission perspective mainly

  971. jonas’

    i.e. whether the granularity is consistent between vcard4 and vcard-temp

  972. marc

    Ge0rG, Zash: how is sasl2 and ibr related? do we always have an authentication (anonymous?) step and then ibr?

  973. Zash

    jonas’, It should be consistent, yes.

  974. Zash

    marc, they would be related somehow in some way such that everything is nicer

  975. marc


  976. Zash

    Oh there's https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html too

  977. Zash

    Wait have we been talking about SASL2 when we should have been talking about IBR2?

  978. Zash

    Such confuse

  979. marc


  980. Zash

    IBR2 is what you want for 0401

  981. Zash

    I think?

  982. marc

    Probably, who came up with SASL2?

  983. Zash

    Dunno, was it me or Ge0rG ?

  984. Zash

    Early connection something 2 that reduces the hackyness of 0401

  985. Nekit has joined

  986. Ge0rG

    Maybe it was Daniel?

  987. Ge0rG

    XMPP 2!

  988. marc

    No bullshit please

  989. winfried has left

  990. winfried has joined

  991. Zash

    SASL2, IBR2, Routing2, ... MAM2

  992. 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)

  993. marc

    Zash, yep, that's what I thought

  994. marc

    Zash, is there a IBR2 XEPs?

  995. marc


  996. eevvoor has joined

  997. Zash

    Linked to it above, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0389.html

  998. marc

    I see

  999. marc

    But atm I don't see the advantage over regular IBR

  1000. eevvoor has left

  1001. adiaholic has left

  1002. winfried has left

  1003. winfried has joined

  1004. vanitasvitae

    Suprise Blog Post! https://blog.jabberhead.tk/2020/02/25/how-to-implement-a-xep-for-smack/

  1005. vanitasvitae

    Fallback Indication was a defenseless victim MWAHAHAHA!!!

  1006. 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.

  1007. 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:

  1008. emus


  1009. pep.

    ugh I hadn't realized Fallback Indication had been accepted..

  1010. pep.

    vanitasvitae, I know it's "just an example" but this is a bad use of 428, considering there's already EME (0380) :/

  1011. pep.

    And we all know people just look at examples

  1012. pdurbin has joined

  1013. vanitasvitae

    yeah thats true

  1014. vanitasvitae

    actually that example made me think that the XEP itself is useless 😀

  1015. vanitasvitae

    But I can imagine some use case for it server side.

  1016. jonas’

    vanitasvitae, neat blog post

  1017. vanitasvitae

    thanks 😉

  1018. pep.

    Yeah I also like the blog post otherwise :)

  1019. pep.

    Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting? If it's not too much a hassle

  1020. vanitasvitae

    My WP theme doesn't support it unfortunately 🙁

  1021. vanitasvitae

    Maybe there is a plugin for that..

  1022. pep.


  1023. jonas’

    I bet there is. and I wouldn’t be surprised if it came with a free remote shell!

  1024. vanitasvitae

    exactly 😛

  1025. Marc has left

  1026. Marc has joined

  1027. marc

    Ge0rG, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of IBR dataforms somewhere?

  1028. debacle has left

  1029. jonas’

    no need to, it contains XEP-0004

  1030. Wojtek has joined

  1031. debacle has joined

  1032. Zash

    jonas’, did you explain the disadvantage(s) of XEP-0004 somewhere? :P

  1033. 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].

  1034. jonas’

    Zash, as a matter of fact, I did, in a recent ProtoXEP

  1035. Ge0rG

    marc: yes, but I don't remember where. Might have been on list on the initial 0401 submission

  1036. Jeybe has left

  1037. marc

    Ge0rG, hm, okay

  1038. pdurbin has left

  1039. 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

  1040. Ge0rG

    And then display the regular IBR dialog instead of a full data form dialog

  1041. Ge0rG

    For which I don't have support anyway

  1042. LNJ has left

  1043. 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..

  1044. jonas’


  1045. jonas’

    from searching for "council", I get the impression that google doesn’t have anything newer than 2017 in its indices

  1046. jonas’

    ah, 2019-march, too

  1047. vanitasvitae

    > Maybe add some kind of syntax highlighting? Done 😉

  1048. pep.

    woo :)

  1049. pep.

    Now it's even more obvious for people to just copy the code!!

  1050. moparisthebest has left

  1051. mukt2 has left

  1052. mukt2 has joined

  1053. Tobias has left

  1054. mukt2 has left

  1055. mukt2 has joined

  1056. Nekit has left

  1057. Jeybe has joined

  1058. pep.

    Alex, https://github.com/xsf/memberbot/pull/1

  1059. pep.

    An idea of why memberbot is so slow btw? Or is it my server again being too far?

  1060. jonas’

    it introduces an intentional delay I think to make it feel more realistic?

  1061. pep.


  1062. pep.

    It's even setting "composing"

  1063. jonas’

    it also sends typing notifications in case you haven’t ... yeah :)

  1064. jonas’

    I quite like that actually

  1065. pep.

    Not too uncanny yet, we're good

  1066. Ge0rG

    Say what? It's adding latency to feel more human like?

  1067. Ge0rG

    I haven't tested yet but I hate it already...

  1068. paul has left

  1069. Zash

    Should fix the thing where messages end up before the responses due to sorting by timestamps with insufficient precision :)

  1070. pep.

    Real life hacks(tm)

  1071. pep.

    btw ad-hoc voting is not enabled on memberbot?

  1072. pep.

    Ah, fulljid.

  1073. Zash


  1074. Ge0rG

    Zash: that should only be an issue if the bot adds timestamp to everything

  1075. pep.

    returns empty nonetheless..

  1076. pep.

    But I see code for it

  1077. Ge0rG

    So it will artificially delay its responses to be more human like, but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes?

  1078. Ge0rG

    And yes, I hate it indeed

  1079. vanitasvitae

    > but it won't accept a "Yes" for a yes? This is especially annoying if you are on mobile

  1080. pep.

    Well I just fixed it. Let's awit for Alex to merge it :)

  1081. Ge0rG

    vanitasvitae: Yes

  1082. vanitasvitae

    Ge0rG, what?

  1083. Zash

    Revive https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/buttons.html ?

  1084. pep.

    Well I just fixed it. Let's wait for Alex to merge it :)

  1085. vanitasvitae

    You mean yes?

  1086. Ge0rG

    Speaking of mobile, the wiki is also unreadable

  1087. Zash

    Yaks, unshaven yaks everywere1

  1088. Zash


  1089. emus has left

  1090. krauq has left

  1091. krauq has joined

  1092. lorddavidiii has left

  1093. andrey.g has left

  1094. winfried has left

  1095. winfried has joined

  1096. winfried has left

  1097. winfried has joined

  1098. debacle has left

  1099. paul has joined

  1100. Jeybe has left

  1101. arc has joined

  1102. moparisthebest has joined

  1103. neshtaxmpp has left

  1104. neshtaxmpp has joined

  1105. krauq has left

  1106. goffi has left

  1107. waqas has left

  1108. arc has left

  1109. arc has joined

  1110. krauq has joined

  1111. Wojtek has left

  1112. raghavgururajan has joined

  1113. debxwoody has joined