XSF Discussion - 2020-02-26

  1. littlesmiley has left
  2. winfried has left
  3. winfried has joined
  4. debxwoody has left
  5. mukt2 has left
  6. mukt2 has joined
  7. moparisthebest has left
  8. andy has left
  9. strypey has joined
  10. mukt2 has left
  11. strypey has left
  12. strypey has joined
  13. mukt2 has joined
  14. raghavgururajan has left
  15. winfried has left
  16. strypey has left
  17. strypey has joined
  18. winfried has joined
  19. winfried has left
  20. winfried has joined
  21. winfried has left
  22. winfried has joined
  23. pdurbin has joined
  24. winfried has left
  25. Marc has left
  26. winfried has joined
  27. paul has left
  28. strypey has left
  29. strypey has joined
  30. winfried has left
  31. krauq has left
  32. krauq has joined
  33. wurstsalat has left
  34. winfried has joined
  35. pdurbin has left
  36. karoshi has left
  37. arc has left
  38. winfried has left
  39. arc has joined
  40. winfried has joined
  41. mukt2 has left
  42. mukt2 has joined
  43. winfried has left
  44. andrey.g has joined
  45. winfried has joined
  46. strypey has left
  47. winfried has left
  48. winfried has joined
  49. winfried has left
  50. winfried has joined
  51. mukt2 has left
  52. arc has left
  53. arc has joined
  54. strypey has joined
  55. strypey has left
  56. strypey has joined
  57. mukt2 has joined
  58. mukt2 has left
  59. mukt2 has joined
  60. moparisthebest has joined
  61. mukt2 has left
  62. strypey has left
  63. strypey has joined
  64. pdurbin has joined
  65. strypey has left
  66. strypey has joined
  67. pdurbin has left
  68. adiaholic has joined
  69. mukt2 has joined
  70. strypey has left
  71. strypey has joined
  72. arc has left
  73. arc has joined
  74. adiaholic has left
  75. adiaholic has joined
  76. strypey has left
  77. Half-Shot[m] has left
  78. Yagiza has joined
  79. Half-Shot[m] has joined
  80. adiaholic has left
  81. mimi89999 has left
  82. mimi89999 has joined
  83. adiaholic has joined
  84. andy has joined
  85. mukt2 has left
  86. pdurbin has joined
  87. aj has joined
  88. mukt2 has joined
  89. aj has left
  90. mukt2 has left
  91. Nekit has joined
  92. lorddavidiii has joined
  93. paul has joined
  94. moparisthebest has left
  95. mukt2 has joined
  96. Tobias has joined
  97. adiaholic has left
  98. adiaholic has joined
  99. j.r has left
  100. j.r has joined
  101. LNJ has joined
  102. mukt2 has left
  103. xelxebar has left
  104. debxwoody has joined
  105. strypey has joined
  106. winfried has left
  107. winfried has joined
  108. strypey has left
  109. strypey has joined
  110. mukt2 has joined
  111. wurstsalat has joined
  112. Ge0rG has left
  113. adiaholic has left
  114. adiaholic has joined
  115. strypey has left
  116. rion has left
  117. paul has left
  118. moparisthebest has joined
  119. mukt2 has left
  120. emus has joined
  121. mukt2 has joined
  122. mukt2 has left
  123. paul has joined
  124. Ge0rG has joined
  125. aj has joined
  126. mukt2 has joined
  127. mukt2 has left
  128. mukt2 has joined
  129. debxwoody has left
  130. mimi89999 has left
  131. mukt2 has left
  132. pdurbin has left
  133. mimi89999 has joined
  134. aj has left
  135. mukt2 has joined
  136. strypey has joined
  137. strypey has left
  138. strypey has joined
  139. xelxebar has joined
  140. matkor has left
  141. matkor has joined
  142. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  143. Dele (Mobile) has left
  144. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  145. Steve Kille has left
  146. strypey has left
  147. Jeybe has joined
  148. mukt2 has left
  149. karoshi has joined
  150. david has left
  151. Steve Kille has joined
  152. mukt2 has joined
  153. strypey has joined
  154. mukt2 has left
  155. Dele (Mobile) has left
  156. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  157. mukt2 has joined
  158. Ge0rG has left
  159. Ge0rG has joined
  160. Marc has joined
  161. mukt2 has left
  162. Dele Olajide has joined
  163. jeybe has joined
  164. alameyo has left
  165. alameyo has joined
  166. mukt2 has joined
  167. Dele (Mobile) has left
  168. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  169. strypey has left
  170. jeybe has left
  171. pdurbin has joined
  172. Steve Kille has left
  173. rion has joined
  174. debacle has joined
  175. Steve Kille has joined
  176. winfried has left
  177. winfried has joined
  178. winfried has left
  179. winfried has joined
  180. adiaholic has left
  181. adiaholic has joined
  182. winfried has left
  183. winfried has joined
  184. winfried has left
  185. winfried has joined
  186. winfried has left
  187. david has joined
  188. winfried has joined
  189. raghavgururajan has joined
  190. pdurbin has left
  191. Dele Olajide has left
  192. Dele (Mobile) has left
  193. adiaholic has left
  194. adiaholic has joined
  195. winfried has left
  196. winfried has joined
  197. winfried has left
  198. raghavgururajan has left
  199. raghavgururajan has joined
  200. winfried has joined
  201. jonas’ This is especially annoying if you are on mobile (*)
  202. jonas’ only if you have functions enabled which are designed to make your life harder by taking control away *scnr*
  203. Zash Is there any reason why you couldn't include a form in the first step of an ad-hoc command? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0050.xml#execute-simple
  204. emus has left
  205. Zash Assuming you know ahead of time what the form looks like, eg because it's standardized by xep-0133 or such
  206. mukt2 has left
  207. jonas’ Zash, you could try, and I guess any sane service would allow it (because if it isn’t stateless, you run into fun DoS opportunities)
  208. winfried has left
  209. goffi has joined
  210. Zash Just got rid of a thing in a convenience wrapper for simple commands that required that one-step commands be stateful.
  211. winfried has joined
  212. winfried has left
  213. goffi has left
  214. goffi has joined
  215. winfried has joined
  216. winfried has left
  217. winfried has joined
  218. winfried has left
  219. raghavgururajan has left
  220. raghavgururajan has joined
  221. winfried has joined
  222. mukt2 has joined
  223. raghavgururajan has left
  224. raghavgururajan has joined
  225. Marc has left
  226. Marc has joined
  227. Alex has left
  228. Alex has joined
  229. Zash has left
  230. Zash has joined
  231. raghavgururajan has left
  232. raghavgururajan has joined
  233. eevvoor has joined
  234. raghavgururajan has left
  235. raghavgururajan has joined
  236. winfried has left
  237. winfried has joined
  238. mukt2 has left
  239. mukt2 has joined
  240. raghavgururajan has left
  241. edhelas has left
  242. edhelas has joined
  243. raghavgururajan has joined
  244. winfried has left
  245. winfried has joined
  246. emus has joined
  247. edhelas has left
  248. marc0s hi, the `source control` link from `https://xmpp.org/about/standards-process.html#submitting-a-xep` points to `https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/xsf-source-control/` (which 404s) and should point to `https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/source-control.html`. I forked the repo and tried to test it locally but the dev server from isn't rendering the menu, don't know why. I think a plausible fix might be ```diff --git a/content/pages/about/standards-process.md b/content/pages/about/standards-process.md index 303616b..38d8bc1 100644 --- a/content/pages/about/standards-process.md +++ b/content/pages/about/standards-process.md @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ Here's how to submit a proposal to the XMPP Standards Foundation for considerati 2. Make sure you read, understand, and agree to the XSF’s [IPR Policy](/about/xsf/ipr-policy) before you submit your proposal! 3. Email the XML file (or a URL for the file) to the [Editor Team](mailto:editor@xmpp.org) with a subject line of "ProtoXEP: [your title here]". -Note: It is the author’s responsibility to provide a properly-formatted source file (see the [template](/extensions/xep-template.xml) file maintained under [source control](/about/xsf/xsf-source-control/)). Proposals submitted in HTML, TXT, MS Word, Open Document Format, etc. will be returned to the proposal author for proper formatting. +Note: It is the author’s responsibility to provide a properly-formatted source file (see the [template](/extensions/xep-template.xml) file maintained under [source control](/about/xsf/source-control.html)). Proposals submitted in HTML, TXT, MS Word, Open Document Format, etc. will be returned to the proposal author for proper formatting. #### Editor creates a ProtoXEP ```
  249. edhelas has joined
  250. raghavgururajan has left
  251. raghavgururajan has joined
  252. debacle has left
  253. marc0s also, the `xep-template.xml` file doesn't exist in the website repo, should it be linked to the raw version from the xeps repo maybe (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/xsf/xeps/master/xep-template.xml)?
  254. LNJ has left
  255. LNJ has joined
  256. pdurbin has joined
  257. edhelas has left
  258. edhelas has joined
  259. raghavgururajan has left
  260. debacle has joined
  261. pdurbin has left
  262. lorddavidiii has left
  263. lorddavidiii has joined
  264. Dele Olajide has joined
  265. littlesmiley has joined
  266. mukt2 has left
  267. Max has left
  268. Dele Olajide has left
  269. adiaholic has left
  270. j.r has left
  271. Dele Olajide has joined
  272. mukt2 has joined
  273. Max has joined
  274. adiaholic has joined
  275. mukt2 has left
  276. adiaholic has left
  277. mukt2 has joined
  278. neshtaxmpp has left
  279. strypey has joined
  280. j.r has joined
  281. mukt2 has left
  282. mimi89999 has left
  283. mukt2 has joined
  284. mimi89999 has joined
  285. strypey has left
  286. lorddavidiii has left
  287. neshtaxmpp has joined
  288. lorddavidiii has joined
  289. pdurbin has joined
  290. lorddavidiii has left
  291. adiaholic has joined
  292. andy has left
  293. andy has joined
  294. lorddavidiii has joined
  295. lorddavidiii has left
  296. pdurbin has left
  297. lorddavidiii has joined
  298. lorddavidiii has left
  299. lorddavidiii has joined
  300. lorddavidiii has left
  301. lorddavidiii has joined
  302. jeybe has joined
  303. jeybe has left
  304. jeybe has joined
  305. Holger has left
  306. Holger has joined
  307. mukt2 has left
  308. mukt2 has joined
  309. emus has left
  310. calvin has joined
  311. mukt2 has left
  312. mukt2 has joined
  313. adiaholic has left
  314. adiaholic has joined
  315. jeybe has left
  316. winfried has left
  317. winfried has joined
  318. jonas’ marc0s: the dev server doesn't render the menu for me either :(
  319. marc0s jonas’, thanks for the feedback
  320. jonas’ marc0s: linking to the xeps repo sounds sane to me
  321. jonas’ go ahead and make a PR against xmpp.org
  322. jonas’ thank you
  323. mukt2 has left
  324. marc0s It also needs some updating, the dev server, as `python -m pelican.server` no longer works, at least with debian's packaged `pelican`, needed to use `pelican --listen`
  325. marc0s jonas’, I will then
  326. adiaholic has left
  327. calvin has left
  328. emus has joined
  329. adiaholic has joined
  330. Wojtek has joined
  331. pdurbin has joined
  332. adiaholic has left
  333. paul has left
  334. paul has joined
  335. adiaholic has joined
  336. mukt2 has joined
  337. pdurbin has left
  338. calvin has joined
  339. pep. yeah there are a few issues that could use some fixing on the website with newer python
  340. mukt2 has left
  341. Douglas Terabyte has left
  342. mukt2 has joined
  343. adiaholic has left
  344. adiaholic has joined
  345. Yagiza has left
  346. Yagiza has joined
  347. paul has left
  348. paul has joined
  349. paul has left
  350. paul has joined
  351. paul has left
  352. paul has joined
  353. paul has left
  354. paul has joined
  355. paul has left
  356. paul has joined
  357. adiaholic has left
  358. adiaholic has joined
  359. calvin has left
  360. calvin has joined
  361. littlesmiley has left
  362. mukt2 has left
  363. mukt2 has joined
  364. littlesmiley has joined
  365. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  366. littlesmiley has left
  367. mukt2 has left
  368. paul has left
  369. paul has joined
  370. larma has left
  371. mimi89999 has left
  372. stpeter has joined
  373. lovetox has left
  374. mukt2 has joined
  375. larma has joined
  376. pdurbin has joined
  377. calvin has left
  378. littlesmiley has joined
  379. stpeter has left
  380. matkor has left
  381. matkor has joined
  382. pdurbin has left
  383. Douglas Terabyte has left
  384. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  385. littlesmiley has left
  386. MattJ Regarding XEP-0313 deferred, please don't LC it
  387. MattJ I have an update incorporating existing feedback that I already received
  388. MattJ I posted this quite some time ago to people who inspired the feedback, I don't think I got any responses and I didn't follow-up
  389. MattJ But given the XEP is widely implemented already I didn't want to just push the changes without agreement that they were sensible
  390. MattJ I can dig up what I had done and post it to standards@ or something, or if people think I should just push it as a new revision I can do that
  391. eevvoor has left
  392. jonas’ MattJ, please do that
  393. neshtaxmpp has left
  394. MattJ Which? :)
  395. jonas’ the posting to standards@
  396. MattJ Sure
  397. jonas’ I wasn’t finished reading the message when I replied :D
  398. jonas’ also, I thnik I’m one of those you pinged and I totally forgot about that and I’d love to check your changes.
  399. littlesmiley has joined
  400. MattJ Here's a diff I generated: https://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/stdin-s2ilB8Kj
  401. MattJ I can dig up the XML from whichever checkout I had it in
  402. jonas’ i see before-id/after-id fields
  403. jonas’ I love it already
  404. jonas’ {+ <field type='text-single' var='urn:example:xmpp:free-text-search'/>+}
  405. jonas’ sugegstion: make this {clark}notated
  406. Marc has left
  407. Syndace has left
  408. Marc has joined
  409. Syndace has joined
  410. jonas’ MattJ, I have a bit more of feedback on this, shall I dump it here or 1:1?
  411. MattJ If it's brain-dump style... an email? (i.e. TODO item for me)
  412. MattJ if it's interactive, I'm fine with here or 1:1
  413. jonas’ brain dump
  414. jonas’ email == jid?
  415. MattJ Email or 1:1 and I'll copy/paste it somewhere :)
  416. MattJ Sure
  417. Daniel has left
  418. jonas’ sent
  419. MattJ Received, thanks!
  420. Daniel has joined
  421. MattJ I'll aim to act on that by the end of next week
  422. jonas’ that sounds amazing
  423. MattJ Still without an office, and my work schedule is suffering :)
  424. mukt2 has left
  425. mukt2 has joined
  426. Steve Kille has left
  427. calvin has joined
  428. Steve Kille has joined
  429. raghavgururajan has joined
  430. Daniel Question to the server developers. I'm assuming that by now you are all treating muc presence with the x user attribute as full joins. To you remember when you started doing so?
  431. Daniel With what version of your respective server software
  432. Daniel Wondering if it is time to remove the good old leave before join work around
  433. adiaholic has left
  434. adiaholic has joined
  435. MattJ Looks like it was Prosody 0.11 when we started rejecting GC 1.0 joins
  436. calvin has left
  437. calvin has joined
  438. MattJ So 2018-11-21
  439. Nekit has left
  440. Dele Olajide has left
  441. littlesmiley has left
  442. Dele Olajide has joined
  443. littlesmiley has joined
  444. lovetox has joined
  445. Visitor has joined
  446. Visitor has left
  447. j.r has left
  448. Tobias has left
  449. Tobias has joined
  450. mimi89999 has joined
  451. Maranda has left
  452. Maranda has joined
  453. j.r has joined
  454. raghavgururajan has left
  455. Shell has joined
  456. littlesmiley has left
  457. littlesmiley has joined
  458. mukt2 has left
  459. pdurbin has joined
  460. littlesmiley has left
  461. littlesmiley has joined
  462. eevvoor has joined
  463. mukt2 has joined
  464. eevvoor has left
  465. pdurbin has left
  466. Ge0rG There are still many pre 0.11 in the wild
  467. Zash Got stats?
  468. krauq has left
  469. krauq has joined
  470. emus has left
  471. winfried has left
  472. winfried has joined
  473. mukt2 has left
  474. Ge0rG Ask jonas
  475. littlesmiley has left
  476. Ge0rG I only have anecdata of Debian oldstable
  477. Yagiza has left
  478. Zash Debian stable has 0.11, oldstable-backports has 0.11, normal support for oldstable likely ends this year
  479. lovetox has left
  480. neshtaxmpp has joined
  481. lovetox has joined
  482. mukt2 has joined
  483. littlesmiley has joined
  484. Visitor2 has joined
  485. Dele Olajide has left
  486. emus has joined
  487. Dele Olajide has joined
  488. Visitor2 has left
  489. mukt2 has left
  490. Dele Olajide has left
  491. Dele Olajide has joined
  492. littlesmiley has left
  493. matkor has left
  494. matkor has joined
  495. littlesmiley has joined
  496. Dele Olajide has left
  497. Dele Olajide has joined
  498. littlesmiley has left
  499. lovetox has left
  500. !XSF_Martin has left
  501. !XSF_Martin has joined
  502. mukt2 has joined
  503. Dele Olajide has left
  504. larma has left
  505. Dele Olajide has joined
  506. flow IMHO usually the ideal point in time to drop compatibility workarounds or older protocol versions is when its about 2 years after the point in time when you should have dropped them
  507. larma has joined
  508. Zash So when do we drop the "MUST support GC 1.0" from XEP-0045?
  509. Dele Olajide has left
  510. flow now that is something we could drop
  511. flow Zash, it appears Smack removed GC 1.0 in 2006
  512. Zash Wait, did Ge0rG and I sneakily remove that MUST already or did I imagine it?
  513. Dele Olajide has joined
  514. Dele Olajide has left
  515. littlesmiley has joined
  516. Ge0rG flow [21:12]: > IMHO usually the ideal point in time to drop compatibility workarounds or older protocol versions is when its about 2 years after the point in time when you should have dropped them May I quote that in https://discourse.igniterealtime.org/t/smack-android-api-requirements/85767
  517. Ge0rG Zash: > Therefore, starting with version 1.32 of this specification, it is RECOMMENDED that a service receiving a <presence> without an <x> element from a non-occupant full-JID responds with an explicit kick to that client.
  518. Ge0rG Not only we removed the requirement to support GC1.0, we even discourage its use
  519. mukt2 has left
  520. Shell has left
  521. Shell has joined
  522. arc has left
  523. arc has joined
  524. flow Ge0rG, the latest release version of Smack requires Android API 9 or higher, and Android API 9 is Android ~10 years ago
  525. flow the upcoming version will bump to Android API 19, which is Android 4.4 released 7 years ago
  526. raghavgururajan has joined
  527. flow so I believe to be reasonable conservative when it comes to supporting old versions
  528. eevvoor has joined
  529. Zash Ge0rG, \o/
  530. eevvoor has left
  531. mukt2 has joined
  532. Ge0rG flow: yes, and now just add two more years...
  533. andrey.g has left
  534. flow Ge0rG, already did so two years ago ;)
  535. Ge0rG I think i have roughly a dozen patches on top of 4.3 now, either adding new features / XEPs, or providing access to internals which I need exposed, or working around real world implementation issues, like the Dino MUC
  536. Ge0rG flow: two years ago it was too early!
  537. Shell has left
  538. Shell has joined
  539. jeybe has joined
  540. littlesmiley has left
  541. littlesmiley has joined
  542. marc Ge0rG, you have the same problem with 389 as with regular IBR, right?
  543. rion has left
  544. littlesmiley has left
  545. littlesmiley has joined
  546. waqas has joined
  547. rion has joined
  548. raghavgururajan has left
  549. marc tbh, I don't see much advantage of 389 at all
  550. Ge0rG marc: no, I see a number of additional problems in 0389
  551. mukt2 has left
  552. Ge0rG proof-of-work just won't work against spammers
  553. marc yep
  554. marc Okay, maybe we can split 401 and PARS but somehow reference them as Daniel suggested (?) and we're done? :)
  555. Ge0rG marc: I think that a split doesn't make sense. Not for the UX and not technically
  556. marc Ge0rG, okay, but why didn't you respond to the mail then?
  557. marc I see a big advantage in easy account creation
  558. marc PARS on top is nice but not a must
  559. Ge0rG You don't have to add the contact from 0401. You could also add everybody who used the same token, like with the snikket Demo
  560. Ge0rG But those are not the main use case
  561. Ge0rG The really important case is adding a friend and having them in the roster automatically
  562. Ge0rG Daniel also made a bet on using the phone address book to automatically add contacts.
  563. Ge0rG My impression is that he considers this bet as failed now
  564. pdurbin has joined
  565. andrey.g has joined
  566. lskdjf has joined
  567. mukt2 has joined
  568. Ge0rG If you remove PARS from 0401, you'll end up with implementations that allow registration from an invitation token, but don't consistently add the contact, so you don't gain much
  569. Shell has left
  570. Shell has joined
  571. Ge0rG Alternatively, you could move the combined functionality into a third XEP, but what would be the benefit?
  572. Daniel To be fair half the implementations do that already
  573. marc Daniel, hm?
  574. marc do what?
  575. Daniel Implement the registration part but not the contact part
  576. marc Daniel, what exactly did you implement from 401, btw?
  577. Daniel The being 'invited' to a server part
  578. Tobias has left
  579. Tobias has joined
  580. Daniel And use the pars token to register
  581. littlesmiley has left
  582. marc Daniel, this means you send the token via ibr to the server?
  583. Daniel Yes
  584. marc Daniel, via IBR or IQ?
  585. Daniel Well the weird pre ibr thing
  586. marc :-(
  587. Daniel I don't have any feelings on that
  588. marc I hate it ^^
  589. Daniel That was just what's supported by prosody
  590. mukt2 has left
  591. lskdjf > marc: I think that a split doesn't make sense. Not for the UX and not technically Ge0rG, I'm also in favour of spliting the two processes. As a UX developer you want the user to get some sort of image of how the application works. And for "getting a contact into your roster", I'm trying to teach the user that this happens by clicking some specific button(s). If you now start to just magically add contacts to the contact list, you break the image I'm trying to convey. What I'd like to do is to add the contact and then perhaps display a dialog "Anna invited you, would you like to add her?". I know you want to make the whole process easier, but adding more concepts doesn't make understanding easier.
  592. marc lskdjf, good point
  593. debacle has left
  594. Daniel I think I said this on list but my interest in the registration part is to avoid open ibr for semi public servers (read hacker space, club) where you can stick a qr code on the wall and everyone who has physical access to the building can sign up. But spammers can't
  595. lskdjf s/What I'd like to do is to add the contact/What I'd like to do is to add the account
  596. Daniel I don't agree at all with the concept of so called easy xmpp
  597. Ge0rG lskdjf: that's interesting indeed. But then would you also introduce the concept of presence subscription and its bidirectionality?
  598. Daniel Which is fine. There can in fact be xeps that I don't agree with
  599. Daniel But I don't like to loose what in my eyes is a valid use case
  600. Ge0rG Daniel: the hacker space functionality is there, just use the domain JID URI
  601. marc Daniel, sure, my primary use case is a similar one
  602. Zash Hackerspace functionality whatnow?
  603. Ge0rG It's even implemented in yaxim and prosody already
  604. pdurbin has left
  605. marc Daniel, and sure, you don't have to agree on everything but I would like to have opinions from experienced devs
  606. Ge0rG Zash: > I think I said this on list but my interest in the registration part is to avoid open ibr for semi public servers (read hacker space, club) where you can stick a qr code on the wall and everyone who has physical access to the building can sign up. But spammers can't
  607. Daniel I know that it is covered. Conversations handles that. But it is a mess to comprehend due to the tight coupling with _shit I don't need_
  608. Zash Ge0rG, ah, ours was set up to limit registrations to the local IPv6 network
  609. mukt2 has joined
  610. Ge0rG Daniel: but it might be shit that your users need...
  611. Zash Everyones needs are different for some weird reason.
  612. marc What _shit_ are you talking about?
  613. Daniel Well the registration part hooks (at very least semantically) on pars
  614. Daniel Which by its name alone is something completely different
  615. lskdjf > lskdjf: that's interesting indeed. But then would you also introduce the concept of presence subscription and its bidirectionality? Ge0rG, depends on the application and how detailt the picture is they convey. The easier version would probably be to say that if "contact X on your roster/friend list" == "contact x gets your information"
  616. arc has left
  617. arc has joined
  618. Shell has left
  619. Shell has joined
  620. Ge0rG I could very well live with changing 0401 to "if the invitation is from a user bare JID, the receiving client shall perform a roster request with the token as a PARS token. The client may first ask the user for permission / guide them through the process"
  621. Ge0rG Would that satisfy Daniel and lskdjf?
  622. paul has left
  623. Daniel I actually read my email again and I think it brings my point across
  624. Daniel You say you don't want to separate the two because you are afraid someone will implement the registration without the subscription part
  625. Daniel I don't think that's something the xep author should decide
  626. Ge0rG Right, the main reason for the XEP should be optional.
  627. mukt2 has left
  628. mukt2 has joined
  629. marc Hm, what about less irony and more constrictive input? 🤔
  630. marc Since there is no good argument against IBR, I would like to keep this as-is, or is there a good argument?
  631. calvin has left
  632. MattJ Seems like I should have participated in this discussion, but I didn't see it was happening
  633. MattJ I don't care much about the protocol - if people don't like the iq thing, come up with something else
  634. matkor has left
  635. matkor has joined
  636. MattJ I think the argument about making the user do more work to add a contact they want to speak to, just to teach them a lesson is... not sound
  637. MattJ We already know the user intent, don't add more clicks or taps than we need to get the task done
  638. MattJ They can learn to add contacts next time they want to add a new contact
  639. winfried has left
  640. winfried has joined
  641. MattJ Getting someone onboarded to the network is enough work already
  642. MattJ We need to remove all the friction we can
  643. pep. "just to teach them a lesson" I can only read this in a pejorative way, is it how you mean it?
  644. MattJ Read it however you want :)
  645. pep. I don't think that's how lskdjf meant it anyway :)
  646. pep. To teach the user habits, patterns
  647. MattJ It doesn't matter, it's what it is doing
  648. MattJ You want to talk to a contact, but first we want you to go through some training
  649. pep. MattJ, no you got it in reverse
  650. moparisthebest to teach the user a lesson we need to implement a XEP I've always dreamed of "remote slapping of a user over the internet"
  651. pep. if you allow that to be one and only step, then next time they want to add somebody they'll be like "why did I have to do something this time?"
  652. MattJ That's nonsense
  653. MattJ Adding contacts is a familiar activity to anyone who wants to add a contact
  654. MattJ Throwing popups in the face of a new user is just not what we need more of right now
  655. pep. I wish we had real UX people to help us tbh. I'm not qualified for this
  656. pep. It seems to me we're all making stabs in the dark
  657. pep. not all all but ..
  658. Zash moparisthebest, search for "xep poke"
  659. Shell has left
  660. Shell has joined
  661. MattJ I don't claim to be a UX expert at all. But the effect of adding steps to an onboarding flow is well documented by now
  662. MattJ (and it's a negative one)
  663. mukt2 has left
  664. eevvoor has joined
  665. strypey has joined
  666. marc > I don't care much about the protocol - if people don't like the iq thing, come up with something else I already came up with something else ;)
  667. MattJ marc: where?
  668. marc In the XEP?
  669. MattJ The current revision?
  670. marc The 'regular' way via IBR
  671. Zash Rough consensus and running code!
  672. MattJ I see a lot of TODO
  673. marc True, not saying the XEP is ready just that there is another way how to provide the token
  674. MattJ I would need to dig up chat logs to remember the things that drove us to the preauth iq, but not depending on the old IBR was one reason
  675. raghavgururajan has joined
  676. MattJ The "new IBR" is not good enough (currently?) though
  677. marc What's the new ibr?
  678. marc I don't see any advantage of 398, if you mean that
  679. MattJ 389
  680. marc Whatever ;)
  681. marc Where is the advantage for 401?
  682. MattJ For 401 alone? None afaik
  683. MattJ For XMPP? It would be nice to have a more flexible registration flow in general
  684. MattJ (I repeat that today's 389 is not that, but it's a step in the right direction)
  685. mukt2 has joined
  686. raghavgururajan has left
  687. marc Yep, but that's off topic for 401 and how to provide the token
  688. raghavgururajan has joined
  689. MattJ Not if the answer is simply "do this preauth thing and register however you want"
  690. marc I'm afk now, but please let me know if there is a good reason for the IQ approach. I really dislike this approach 😶
  691. Zash ^ is why I dislike IBR, weird thing looking like an iq stanza long before that's supposed to be allowed
  692. MattJ I agree
  693. MattJ I'd love to move away from all iqs before bind
  694. Zash At least in Prosody it's not even treated as a stanza, just a weird "nonza" that happens to be in the "jabber:client" namespace
  695. calvin has joined
  696. Zash ... not anymore. Used to be an uncomfortable amount of of exceptions in a bunch of places that allowed iq stanzas on unauthenticated connections under certain conditions
  697. Zash So, it would be nice to get 389 moving again.
  698. jeybe has left
  699. Tobias has left
  700. Shell has left
  701. raghavgururajan has left
  702. mukt2 has left
  703. LNJ has left
  704. eevvoor has left
  705. mimi89999 has left
  706. gav has left
  707. lskdjf has left
  708. lskdjf has joined
  709. lskdjf has left
  710. lskdjf has joined
  711. lskdjf has left
  712. lskdjf has joined
  713. lskdjf has left
  714. lskdjf has joined
  715. Nekit has joined
  716. lskdjf has left
  717. lskdjf has joined
  718. calvin has left
  719. calvin has joined
  720. lskdjf has left
  721. lskdjf has joined
  722. mukt2 has joined
  723. pdurbin has joined
  724. lskdjf has left
  725. lskdjf has joined
  726. lskdjf has left
  727. lskdjf has joined
  728. pdurbin has left
  729. Wojtek has left
  730. strypey has left
  731. strypey has joined
  732. calvin has left
  733. mukt2 has left
  734. lskdjf has left
  735. emus has left
  736. lskdjf has joined
  737. karoshi has left
  738. lskdjf has left
  739. lskdjf has joined
  740. Jeybe has left
  741. raghavgururajan has joined
  742. mukt2 has joined
  743. lskdjf has left
  744. lskdjf has joined
  745. goffi has left
  746. raghavgururajan has left
  747. mukt2 has left
  748. raghavgururajan has joined
  749. strypey has left
  750. raghavgururajan has left
  751. marc0s should I do something special to have firefox render XEP's XML files? it complains about `XML Parsing Error: undefined entity` while chrome displays it without any problem
  752. lskdjf has left
  753. lskdjf has joined
  754. lskdjf has left
  755. lskdjf has joined
  756. lskdjf has left
  757. lskdjf has joined
  758. lskdjf has left
  759. lskdjf has joined
  760. lskdjf has left
  761. lskdjf has joined
  762. andy has left
  763. raghavgururajan has joined
  764. intosi has left