I think it would be nice to have a MUC for new users listet here: https://xmpp.org/community/chat.html
DebXWoody
I'm quite new in the XMPP topic, but I also had some problems to get into xmpp. xmpp.org is very technical. jabber.org is not working.
Neustradamushas left
jonas’
DebXWoody, I think it would be nice to have a MUC for new users first
jonas’
we don’t have that
Jeybehas joined
Nekithas joined
Neustradamushas joined
DebXWoody
jonas’, I know. As I started to work on https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Guide/de and I think I ask for a mailinglist for users-community, there was a Feedback like "XSF in not responsible for users". This would be fine also, but in such case "we" need to start with something which will take care of users.
I would volunteer for support of German Community.
krauqhas joined
debaclehas joined
Marandahas joined
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
Marandahas left
Marandahas joined
alexishas left
andrey.ghas joined
mukt2has left
alexishas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
mukt2has joined
archas left
archas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
jcbrandhas joined
emushas joined
adiaholic_has joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
bearhas left
sonnyhas left
sonnyhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
Alexhas joined
Andrzejhas joined
karoshihas left
Shellhas joined
karoshihas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has left
karoshihas left
flow
create an entity which acts as xmpp foss software hoster (gitlab) and discussion platform (discourse) that attracts developers and users likewise?
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
karoshihas joined
mukt2has joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
dwdhas left
dwdhas joined
andrey.ghas left
Danielhas left
emus
I thought so too for a while. I am also a fried of "centralized communication" but still having a decentral network
Danielhas joined
jonas’
ew discourse
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
karoshihas left
flow
jonas’, it's probably easier for end-user to use discourse than mailing lists
emus
I dont like mailing lists, too.
flow
I like them, but I also like discourse :)
jonas’
discourse is very non-attractive to me
emus
I think DebXWoody point is a different one
karoshihas joined
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
bearhas joined
karoshihas left
Holger
I don't get the point. There's rooms such as xmpp:jabber@conference.jabber.org?join already, and also mailing lists. Nobody uses those. Adding more venues on top will make people use them?
Holger
I would've thought normal end users won't use any of those. They'll complain on the app store if something doesn't work, that's it.
karoshihas joined
Holger
For power users actually interested in XMPP (as opposed to just their app), there are rooms already, and they are actually used, no?
Zash
Probably because https://search.jabber.network/ can't index jabber.org atm, so people looking for generic discussion channels find whichever ones happen to sound interesting.
jonas’
> There's rooms such as xmpp:jabber@conference.jabber.org?join
cannot be found via s.j.n
Holger
Ok. So the fix is migrating jabber.org to Prosody, no?
jonas’
maybe
jonas’
depending on what’s going on in there
jonas’
I wasn’t aware of that room until just now ;)
Ge0rG
maybe just removing invalid JIDs from the storage will already solve it?
jonas’
yes
jonas’
but that’s apparently hard
jonas’
because M-Link
Kev
> Holger
> Ok. So the fix is migrating jabber.org to Prosody, no?
The problem with j.o isn't that it's not Prosody, but that it's been abandoned and not had any updates installed in about 4 years. Just for the record ;)
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Guus
none-the-less, Holger does make a valid point.
Guus
jabber.org has the benefit of being very recognizable. If we can improve its utilization, that would be good.
jonas’
agreed
Kev
jonas’: I'm not sure it's hard, is it? Someone just needs to delete the dodgy file off disk (which is pre-M-Link)
flow
I think end-users unable to use their xmpp client are probably also unable to join an xmpp based chat room. and yes the ML is used, but I'd argue mostly not by end-users
karoshihas left
jonas’
Kev, I have no idea
Kev
I'm a little offended that people are treating it as M-Link's fault that the jabber.org admins stopped adminning jabber.org.
jonas’
I don’t have shell here, but that the problem persists for over a year now despite me providing an exact list of invalid JIDs makes me think that it’s hard✎
karoshihas joined
jonas’
I don’t have shell there, but that the problem persists for over a year now despite me providing an exact list of invalid JIDs makes me think that it’s hard ✏
Holger
Kev: Sorry, I didn't mean it that way at all.
Holger
Sounds like it's actually ejabberd's fault 🙂
jonas’
I also can’t judge if it’s M-Links (the software’s) fault or not. More likely it’s that nobody with M-Link experience is left to work on jabber.org
Holger
(If you took over borked data from ejabberd.)
Kev
I don't know if it's ejabberd's fault either, it could date back to jabberd for all I know :)
Kev
(Actually, it's MUC so it'd be the old MUC component, if of that era)
Holger
Whatever, I was just assuming a migration of the service would involve cleaning up the data.
jonas’
it certainly would
Guus
What's the status of the migration?
krauqhas left
jonas’
"In progress"
Ge0rG
jonas’: you mean similarly to how the last migration cleaned up invalid data?
jonas’
Ge0rG, no, because this time people are aware
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
archas left
archas joined
karoshihas joined
xeckshas joined
DebXWoody
I was not able to join jabber.org because of Server-to-server connection failed: Connecting failed: dh key too small
jonas’
that, too, is an issue which is hopefully to be fixed with the migration.
mukt2has left
karoshihas left
DebXWoody
new users should join xmpp:jabber@conference.jabber.org which can not be found on the website of xmpp.org. It's not possible to find via the search website and the most provider are not able to join the server at all. Is is correct?
Holger
So maybe add that room to <https://xmpp.org/community/chat.html>? Like <JUser@jabber.org> is listed on <https://xmpp.org/community/mailing-lists.html>?
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
DebXWoody
+1 if the "Connecting failed: dh key too small" is sloved
Holger
Though I'm still not sure the "XMPP user" role makes much sense. Users use apps, not protocols. Is there an SMTP/IMAP forum for new Thunderbird users?
Daniel
> Though I'm still not sure the "XMPP user" role makes much sense. Users use apps, not protocols. Is there an SMTP/IMAP forum for new Thunderbird users?
+1
Shellhas left
Daniel
To be fair that's partially our fault because we have been trying to market XMPP to end users
Shellhas joined
pep.
That ^
Kev
Which isn't necessarily wrong, depending what you consider 'end users' to be.
Daniel
we should probably stop that instead improving it
Kev
It's the properties of XMPP, rather than particular apps, that are the interesting part to many organisations wanting to use it.
Daniel
!developers
karoshihas joined
pep.
Daniel, I do think there's room for more than just developers. But we don't need to target everybody for sure
Kev
That is - some orgs 'buy' XMPP, and then go to find clients/servers that satisfy their particular requirements.
pep.
Kev, I'm not sure that's something I'd target either tbh. XMPP is vast enough so that you'll eventually (very quickly) run into interop issues if you don't all use the same things and have a somewhat tailored server setup
Holger
I think it's fine to run such a room, list in on the web site, hang around in that room, and answer the occasional questions. I just don't share any hopes that go beyond that, i.e. building up an XMPP end-user 'community' or something.
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
adiaholic_has left
adiaholic_has joined
krauqhas joined
mukt2has joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
robertooohas left
jonas’
I don’t have any hopes for that, I just want to redirect the flow of new users from the technical rooms
lskdjfhas joined
!XSF_Martin
Didn't pep. plan to do some joinxmpp website which should serve as a starting point for new users?
pep.
yeah there's that, which doesn't get much attention (from me) atm. I was never happy with the name though. I'd say if it becomes a thing it would only represent a subset of XMPP servers/clients (somewhat like snikket, maybe the same, maybe not)
pep.
From what I understand this is not MattJ's intention to have Snikket become a thing to which users can openly register, so maybe not just like Snikket :)
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has left
karoshihas left
Mikaelahas joined
MattJ
Indeed
!XSF_Martin
Yeah, XMPP is very broad and not really a snappy term you would give to 'normal users'. Snippet is better marketing wise but a too small subset of the XMPP ecosystem.✎
!XSF_Martin
Yeah, XMPP is very broad and not really a snappy term you would give to 'normal users'. Snikket is better marketing wise but a too small subset of the XMPP ecosystem. ✏
MattJ
It's not out of the question that a public/semi-public service would use Snikket, but providing such a service is not the goal of Snikket
!XSF_Martin
Every single time I write snippet instead of snikket. 😂
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Zash
FWIW you can get around the dh key issue by giving ECDHE higher priority, which a soon to be released Prosody version will do by default.
karoshihas joined
krauqhas left
Neustradamushas left
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
robertooohas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
karoshihas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
mukt2has joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
dwdhas left
dwdhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
Mikaelahas left
Mikaelahas joined
rionis going to make an emoji-oriented PR for https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0038.html
If anyone is interested in the XEP, send me your ideas.
krauqhas joined
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
archas left
archas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Mikaelahas left
lorddavidiiihas left
karoshihas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
Nekithas left
Mikaelahas joined
Nekithas joined
rion
Basically I want to add categories and maybe also subcategories. Also I will add options to show an icon is a variant of another icon (all those about skin color. In UI it supposes to show the original icon in the icon selector but with a capability to select a variant on a long click or any other way).
I think to add search keywords in accordance to https://unicode.org/emoji/charts-13.0/emoji-list.html
Also somewhat unrelated to emoji but still needed is a way to tell the application where an raster icon may be scaled when presented to the user or it's better to keep the original resolution.
neshtaxmpphas joined
xsfhas left
rion
I'm also thinking about metadata features. Like where it's white and black, better looking on the white or black background. Maybe something related to color blindness too.
Nekithas left
intosihas left
Nekithas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
intosihas joined
paulhas left
paulhas joined
Shellhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
Shellhas joined
jcbrand
Recently I registered fedi.chat (like fediverse), thinking that it could potentially becomes a user friendly endpoint.
karoshihas left
jcbrand
I also think it makes sense to come up with a new name for the federated network, to keep it separate from XMPP
jcbrand
Jabber is a good name, but trademarked
karoshihas joined
jcbrand
So I thought maybe fedichat is better
jcbrand
But it's maybe still to technical
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
papatutuwawahas joined
Link Mauve
It sounds cool at least (to me).
mimi89999has left
pep.
I'm afraid it's gonna be associated with fediverse a bit too much and people are gonna be confused why they can't use one with the other
Link Mauve
Isn’t it already an issue with all of these “ActivityPub” software?
pep.
You mean MastodonPub?
Link Mauve
What is the trademark situation on “fediverse” btw?
!XSF_Martin
> So I thought maybe fedichat is better
> But it's maybe still to technical
For people not knowing it means federated chat it's just brand/name so still ok. I guess a lot of old people know only WhatsApp is the name of that chat app not knowing it's derived from the english 'What's up?'
mimi89999has joined
Daniel
So WhatsApp is like Hanuta?
!XSF_Martin
> I'm afraid it's gonna be associated with fediverse a bit too much and people are gonna be confused why they can't use one with the other
I guess if you ask random people on the street most won't know about fediverse so that's probably not a big issue.
!XSF_Martin
> So WhatsApp is like Hanuta?
No, I can't eat WhatsApp but I can eat a Haselnusstafel. 😂
But yeah, I guess for most elderly it's like that.
Zash
pep., I've heard some argue that "fediverse" means all federated things, but yeah, it's mostly associated with Mastodon atm
pep.
Zash, I've heard some argue that it's all the federated web things :P
Between the people who block omemo and those who enable it by default it seems we can't even agree on a common user experience. So I'm honestly not sure if coming up with a name is the most important step here
Guus, I think "we" needs to be external to the XSF
jcbrand
I agree
karoshihas left
pep.
I don't think the XSF should dictate UI/UX
Guus
agreed.
pep.
Snikket is a good experiment this way. There can be others
jcbrand
There is also modern.xmpp
pep.
It's "the same" (person)
Daniel
Obviously not the xsf. But I think if I installed a fedichat client I'd expect it to work with other fedichat clients
jcbrand
there are more people involved in modern.xmpp
karoshihas joined
jcbrand
IMO, the UI sprint kinda fell under that initiative
pep.
I don't think the UI sprint was meant to be for modernxmpp in particular but it got picked up by modernxmpp (which is not a bad outcome)
jcbrand
Daniel: that's the nice thing about having a name... you can make it a certification. If you want to be able to give yourself the name (or at least be on the official site), then you need to conform to the established rules
jcbrand
i.e. any app that calls itself a fedicaht app needs to adhere to certain UI and UX rules
pep.
"pep.> I don't think the XSF should dictate UI/UX" also why I strongly disagree with having 393 as a draft btw :x
Daniel
jcbrand: I agree that fedichat or what ever could be a certification (or should even) but again it doesn't feel like we as a community will be able to come up with a consensus
Daniel
I mean omemo is arguably the most touchy subject but that will divide the 'modern xmpp crowd' in half
jcbrand
IMO you just need a sufficiently motivated group of people to start something and then others can either join or not. We don't need buy-in from the entire community
Daniel
That I generally agree with
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
krauqhas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
eevvoorhas joined
debaclehas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
adiaholic_has left
karoshihas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
karoshihas joined
Kevhas joined
Mikaelahas left
adiaholic_has joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
MattJ
I agree that a "common user experience" is not something we're going to achieve, nor necessarily want to
MattJ
I've been considering breaking Modern XMPP up into "profiles"
MattJ
Similar to what we've started to do with the complaince suites
MattJ
We touched on this at the summit, during the discussion about (iirc) "rich status"
MattJ
For some audiences such a thing would be something like WhatsApp stories, for others it could just mean adding an emoji to your status message
Daniel
if you end up creating as many profiles as there are products I don’t see the benefits of marketing the profile instead of the product though
MattJ
Obviously the intention would not be to do that :)
MattJ
I mean, look at the situation on iOS where we have so many clients that would fall into the "personal messaging" category, but they all have vastly different terminology, UI patterns and feature sets
Zash
So, given the existence of both anti-omemo and pro-omemo-only folks, we can't have the most basic interop at all.
Kev
I don't think most folks are anti-omemo, just pro-things-that-omemo-prevents.
Kev
FWIW.
papatutuwawahas left
Shellhas left
Unlifehas left
Unlifehas joined
Zash
I'm anti-removal-of-my-choice-in-clients.
pep.
fwiw I'd probably still be using poezio or similar, because "I know" and I can adapt to different "profiles"
pep.
(and poezio allows me to)
pep.
I don't have enough time to write a client per profile
Zash
Yay modularity
pep.
But I'm not (we're not) your random end-user
moparisthebest
what does omemo prevent?
jonas’
moparisthebest, server side search for one
moparisthebest
and don't say history across devices because that just requires some not-yet-existing history sync
pep.
moparisthebest, "not encrypting" :P
Zash
using non-omemo clients becomes very painful
Link Mauve
moparisthebest, until recently, anything that wasn’t part of the body.
jonas’
Link Mauve, and in practice, still, because implementations are not quite there yet. and the ecosystem has been damaged from that "but we can’t omemo that" attitude for a while now
moparisthebest
jonas’, why
jonas’
moparisthebest, why what?
moparisthebest
yes no argument there Link Mauve , but that's fixed *soon*
jonas’
why if messages are end-to-end encrypted you cannot do full-text search inside the encrypted data on the server?
moparisthebest
jonas’, server side search, why
moparisthebest
yea but you can on the client
jonas’
that’s not "server side search"
jcbrand
moparisthebest: Any kinds of attachments (e.g. emoji-reactions or mentions) (at least until recently)✎
jcbrand
moparisthebest: Any kinds of references (e.g. emoji-reactions or mentions) (at least until recently) ✏
jonas’
moparisthebest, yeah, see how well that performs on mobile. conversations is extremely slow because it has to keep the fts index up-to-date
moparisthebest
and everyone running prosody or ejabberd on their rpi1 won't be very happy with FTS on the server, meh
pep.
Also because people whom it concerns are not saying it or are hiding behind other excuses I will for them (you can thank me later): OMEMO also non-GPL implementations (or at least makes it harder) :)✎
pep.
Also because people whom it concerns are not saying it or are hiding behind other excuses I will for them (you can thank me later): OMEMO also prevents non-GPL implementations (or at least makes it harder) :) ✏
jonas’
I suspect the portion of users doing that is *much* smaller than the portion of users running an XMPP IM client on a smartphone.
jonas’
pep., not anymore it doesn’t
jonas’
or did I miss something?
Daniel
to be fair as far as I understand it your situtation jonas’ is a bit special because you turn Conversations on once per week
jonas’
Daniel, yes, because otherwise it’d drain my battery all the time for the same reason
Daniel
and Conversations is a bit shitty about the way MAM catchups are stored in sql
pep.
jonas’, dunno, just making fun of some who hide behind other excuses while that was actually a pretty obvious end-goal
Daniel
that can (and probably should) be optimized
jonas’
and because I can’t stand my phone vibrating when I don’t want to pay attention to it
moparisthebest
so far I've heard valid reasons not to use historical omemo, and not much else, that seems right
moparisthebest
jonas’, that's what the quiet hours are for
jonas’
moparisthebest, thanks for just ignoring server-side search and references as a valid reason.
jonas’
moparisthebest, no, because I want to get non-XMPP text messages (and other stuff) still.
moparisthebest
references aren't an issue right?
moparisthebest
server-side search, yea, I think that's useless
moparisthebest
I guess if you want to offload search to some other more powerful device you can right?
jonas’
moparisthebest, good argument there, love it /s
jonas’tunes out
mukt2has left
Link Mauve
moparisthebest, basically anything where the server would want to see the messages, be it for spam reasons, for long-term archiving, etc.
moparisthebest
did I misunderstand? I think both Link Mauve and jcbrand brought up good reasons why it wasn't ready to use historically, but that's solved in latest versions
Link Mauve
moparisthebest, also the issue of getting a new device and being unable to see previous history.
moparisthebest
^ that just needs some history sync thing
jonas’
"just"
Link Mauve
(Which for me would be a deal stopper.)
moparisthebest
I've heard WA has history sync, I wonder if they have any documents about how it works
Daniel
MAM sync between devices should be relatively easy (on paper)
Daniel
with a bit of luck I might get paid to implement that at some point
MattJ
Nice
moparisthebest
well and with omemo encrypting everything now, also actually safe
adiaholic_has left
adiaholic_has joined
Daniel
jingle; web rtc data channels; and encrypted xml streams (what's the name again)
moparisthebest
ok these are less impressive than you would have thought https://faq.whatsapp.com/android/chats/how-to-restore-your-chat-history https://faq.whatsapp.com/iphone/chats/how-to-restore-your-chat-history
Daniel
so in your home network it doesn’t even hit your server
moparisthebest
tl;dr "just back up to $creep-cloud then restore!"
Daniel
plus is reasonable secure
mukt2has joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
Jeybehas left
Nekithas left
Nekithas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Mikaelahas joined
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
waqashas joined
karoshihas left
waqashas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
karoshihas joined
Neustradamushas joined
thorstenhas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Shellhas joined
andrey.ghas joined
andyhas left
andyhas joined
j.rhas left
j.rhas joined
alexishas left
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
adiaholic_has left
adiaholic_has joined
andrey.ghas left
lovetoxhas joined
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
stpeterhas joined
jjrh
I'm currently trying to work with a proprietary client that doesn't even display error messages :/ Like if you send to a invalid jid, one that doesn't exist, or in my usecase if the component is down, it doesn't inform the user at all.
Zash
Not great :(
debaclehas joined
neshtaxmpphas joined
debaclehas left
debaclehas joined
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
andrey.ghas joined
lovetoxhas left
jjrh
Pretty bizarre I would have thought they would at least tell you if it was a invalid jid
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
pep.
"invalid jid" and "jid that doesn't exist" are different things
jjrh
well it was happy to do test.example.com (a typo on my part)
jjrh
but yeah that's a fair point.
Zash
No indication if you e.g. message xmpp:someone@reject.badxmpp.eu ?
jjrh
not as far as I can see.
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
jjrh
You see all this in the logs so I guess they just haven't implemented it in the gui
!XSF_Martin
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0377.html#payload « I don't understand example 3. Shouldn't there also be an opening for the spam element and an JID in it?
Marandahas left
pep.
!XSF_Martin, no it's just an empty <spam/>
Marandahas joined
pep.
The text can be confusing yeah. And there's no schema of course
!XSF_Martin
So, I tell the server I receive spam but I won't reveal the spammers JID? Sounds like some academic example that doesn't make much sense. Or am I missing the point about sending a report like this?
I also find sad that the two are not separate, but that's a start..
!XSF_Martin
Yeah, but that's only when you combine it with blocking, so it only works with your server, right? I had a look at the XEP because I was curious if you could implement in a client to also report spammers from remote servers to their server.
The IODEF could use an example of the minimum you'd actually need, ie JID and a reason✎
Zash
The IODEF XEP* could use an example of the minimum you'd actually need, ie JID and a reason ✏
pep.
> A client software doesn't need to interrupt a user when processing such marked stanzas: for example, it may put them silently in "SPAM" folder, so a user can look through them at any time later.
pep.
Interesting. How do they implement a spam folder
pep.
(0287)
Zash
Similar to how you implement the inbox folder? :)
pep.
not
Lancehas joined
!XSF_Martin
Mickaël Rémond is one of the XEP-0268 authors so I would expect it to be supported by ejabberd…
!XSF_Martin
Uh, and MattJ too…
Wojtekhas joined
Zash
You can contribute to the XEP without implementing it :)
!XSF_Martin
Obviously. 😃
winfriedhas left
winfriedhas joined
Guus
Interessed to see how spam will play out after jabber.org gets a new server.
Guus
Pretty much all spam that I receive comes through that.
Guus
I wonder how fast updated spam lists will circulate.
Jeybehas left
!XSF_Martin
You receive spam on your JID there or from spammers using that server?
Ge0rG
Wasn't IBR disabled on j.o a decade ago?
karoshihas left
Neustradamus
Psi Stop Spam plugin is really good :)
Neustradamus
Since several years, I do not see spam messages
Guus
I receive spam on my j.o account. The senders are on other servers.
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
Neustradamus
Guus: Same!
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
Danielhas left
karoshihas joined
Danielhas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
papatutuwawahas joined
karoshihas left
adiaholic_has left
adiaholic_has joined
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
papatutuwawahas left
eevvoorhas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
mukt2has left
Nekithas left
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
neshtaxmpphas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
karoshihas left
Nekithas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
Ge0rG
I've heard there are servers with sophisticated spam filters where the user doesn't need to do anything or solve captchas
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
karoshihas joined
mukt2has joined
Zash
Rule #1 of spam fighting: Don't talk about rules of spam fighting
pep.
Are you a reflection of myself?
Zash
Rule #2 of fight club: Don't assume anyone remembers the plot of fight club
jonas’
Sam claims that the github permissions thing is confusing. Am I misreading this?
below that, it shows a list of all orgs I’m part of
jonas’
how can I read that except "that software will gain +rw on all things I can see on github"?
Nekithas left
pep.
I think you read correctly
pep.
But maybe you can test for yourself with some oauth thing you build :x
jonas’
suuure
lovetoxhas joined
Kev
Yes, Github's lack of sensible roles is horrific.
Nekithas joined
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
krauqhas left
Nekithas left
Guus
Isn't the go-to solution to create an account that has access only to the repository it needs to operate on?
jonas’
Guus, yes, that would be worth a shot I guess
jonas’
I won’t do that, and I won’t interact wtih that account though
jonas’
for reasons I’d rather not disclose here
Guus
sounds like something that iteam wants to weigh in before we do anything anyway.
jonas’
indeed
jonas’
not that I’m not an iteam meamber ;)
jonas’
it seems like a useful thing to have, also for potential future automation tasks like commenting on issues or stuff
Zash
service accounts eh?
jonas’
they call it "machine accounts" in the ToS and you’re only allowed to have one per human
wurstsalathas left
wurstsalathas joined
flow
let's make babies then!
paulhas left
jonas’
and it’s not quite clear to me if such a usage is a "machine account" or if you need more than just that
jonas’
flow, that sounds like quite a drastic solution to the problem
paulhas joined
moparisthebest
woah flow , what a proposal :P
flow
well cloning isn't feasiable yet, so?
jonas’
I’ll post that to the list, let’s see if Sam and Guus consider that too complicated, too ;)
jonas’
Guus actually might have first-hand experience on that.
Guus
I hear the latter can be annoying
Zash
I hear some here actually have a head start on that
Guus
Sam's pretty cool though.
flow
But serious: Not that it matters, but I would favor a single git repository hosting solution, preferably gitlab
jonas’
flow, *personally*, I’d also prefer to just switch over to gitlab, because it’s the easiest solution to the problem (for me, because I know GitLab CI from work and stuff, and what I’ve seen so far from GitHub Actions is not convincing me), but I hear the input from the others that it’ll be pretty disruptive for the community
pep.
flow, depending on how "human" is defined, they may only allow one per uniquely identifiable human(?) and thus discard cloning
Daniel
+1. If the editors think gitlab will help them do their job better we should just do that
pep.
^ this (again)
pep.
Daniel stop agreeing with me today
jonas’notes that no consenting voices were seen on the mailing list
Daniel
I think that someone who edits a XEP should be able to setup a gitlab account
flow
pep., what about multiple personalities? do they count as uniquely identifiable human?✎
Daniel
It's not that hard
flow
pep., what about multiple personalities? do they count as uniquely identifiable humans? ✏
pep.
yeah I also note that I haven't replied to the list
pep.
flow, I'll leave that for you to answer
jonas’
Daniel, someone off-list mentioned to me that there are concerns about getting a company to allow you to use $platform, and it’s more likely that $company has already allowed GitHub than GitLab
Kev
Daniel: It's not so much that they *can't*, as that it's effort, and we need to balance the cost of contributing with the cost of Editor work. And if that means GitLab, so be it - but it's a tradeoff rather than a straight win, I believe.
flow
Plus, as always, you are not required to created an gitlab account to submit protoxeps and patches✎
pep.
You are indeed not required
pep.
Sending patches to editors is always possible
flow
Plus, as always, you are not required to created a gitlab account to submit protoxeps and patches ✏
pep.
I'm happy to do/encourage this (as an editor) if that means we can allow editors to move more easily
Daniel
*If* it comes down to not burning out our editors VS losing a contribution it'd rather take the former
Daniel
Because without editors we can't do anything
Kev
Daniel: I think that's the point I made on list.
jonas’
Thanks for the increasing amount of feedback here
jonas’
I’d really like to get to a point where editors can just hit "Merge when pipeline succeeds" if a change passes all editorial requirements; A simple button function which github doesn’t even have :(
flow
hmm merge trains are not avaialble on gitlab.com, aren't they?✎
flow
hmm merge trains are not avaialble on gitlab.com, are they? ✏
jonas’
not for free, methinks
jonas’
haven’t used them either, are they cool?
flow
well if we'd host our own gitlab we could get a license where they are available
flow
jonas’, I consider merge trains and building merge results a deal breaker
jonas’
flow, that are two things right away which I’d not like us to have to
jonas’
(self-host and license)
jonas’
I’d prefer to buy the respective Tier at the SaaS offering
flow
Uh I probably should have written: I consider *not having* merge trains and building/CIing merge results a deal breaker
jonas’
(FTR, merge trains are, for both SaaS and self-hosted, on the second tier, i.e. $19/user/month)
flow
works for me, although I believe we could self-host
jonas’
what do you mean with "building/CIing merge results"?
jonas’
this one? https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/merge_request_pipelines/pipelines_for_merged_results/index.html
flow
jonas’, MRs and PRs are usually build against the branchs HEAD, and not against the merge result of source and destination branch of the MR/PR
flow
jonas’, I think this, yes
jonas’
read up on it, sounds nice, but I don’t consider this a must-have
jonas’
not for xeps anyways, because it is very unlikely to have a fast-forward-able merge which breaks things
flow
I wouldn't want to miss it for software projects
jonas’
I can believe that
jonas’
but build-wise, XEPs are fairly independent from one another
jonas’
when merging two different changes on the same XEP, editors typically step in to handle the revision blocks manually anyways
vanitasvitaehas left
flow
jonas’, I think this mostly means that merge trains are not that interesting for the xeps repo, but not pipelines for merged results
jonas’
I think what I said also applies for pipelines for merged results
flow
those should always provide in advantage compared to the standard behavior or github PRs and gitlab MRs
vanitasvitaehas joined
flow
assume we had linting in the XEPs repo, and you add a new lint check to master✎
jonas’
aha, yeah, that
jonas’
I see that one now
flow
assume we had linting to the XEPs repo, and you add a new lint check to master ✏
flow
bbl
jonas’
still I see it only as nice-to-have
jonas’
I mean we don’t have that on GitHub and we survived thus far
krauqhas joined
Zash
The XSF got along before Github even
jonas’
also true
waqashas joined
APachhas left
APachhas joined
etahas left
etahas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
vanitasvitaehas joined
Yagizahas left
Shellhas left
Shellhas joined
mukt2has left
krauqhas left
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
archas left
archas joined
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
adiaholic_has left
adiaholic_has joined
pep.
"XSF, P.O. Box 1641, Denver, CO 80201 USA" Is there still anybody at the other end of this box? (reading the IPR)
pep.
"Version 1.4 (2008-01-23): Updated legal notices to use modified MIT License rather than Creative Commons Attribution License for the purpose of enabling wider distribution of XEP text and examples, including incorporation into free software; added Disclaimer of Warranty and Limitation of Liability."
Does someody know the origin of this change?
mukt2has joined
Zash
Can you mail XEP patches there? :)
Nekithas joined
pep.
Like some challenge?
pep.
I just "grepped" for "IPR" in all 2007's subjects on standards and found nothing. There seem to only be stpeter's email in January 2008 saying "it's done!"
jonas’
pep., IPR sounds more like a board matter
jcbrandhas left
pep.
Well yeah but somebody would have raised the issue somewhere else before
pep.
And then board taking action
jonas’
not if board figured out themselves that CC + FLOSS licenses don’t mix well
pep.
CC + FLOSS does mix :x and is probably more appropriate to stuff that isn't "software"
pep.
Just as MIT says
werdanhas joined
jonas’
pep., well, I recall that CC + FLOSS license mixing was not well understood in the 00s
jonas’
and people were cautious
jcbrandhas joined
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
pep.
btw how does versioning of the IPR work? There doesn't seem to be anything in the document saying "and you also accept any change of this document". Does that mean everybody needs to resign? Or that some XEPs are served under a CC and some under a MIT-like license?
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
pep.
(and "you also accept any change to this document" is not legal in some legislations anyway.. like France aiui)
jonas’
pep., AFAIK, all XEPs use the same IPR template
pep.
Yeah but you can't just change the terms of what people agree to if you don't say anything about it :x
jonas’
indeed
Kev
That's why the policy is handing over IPR to the XSF, rather than licensing to the XSF.
Kev
(Or as close to it as a local jurisdiction allows)
The contribution agreement isn't to license XEPs to the XSF, it's to give them.
pep.
hmm ok so CLA-like
pep.
jonas’, ^ so I doubt it's possible to do what we thought
pep.
(And yes it's actually handled as a CLA on github, but it's a bit confusing)
jonas’
I obviously don’t know what happened back then, but I suppose if we had to do it again, it’d be a mixture of getting people to re-sign + fixing the rendering so that the difference is clear
Jeybehas joined
pep.
Well as I understand it now, resign wouldn't be necessary because you agreed to give ownership to the XSF (that can then change licenses over your work at will). In legislations where this is even possible
pep.
(which is probably not in France, still, but..)
andyhas left
pep.
Thanks Kev, that helps.
pep.
Still curious why the last revision if anybody's got info
Shellhas left
jonas’
yeah, I hadn’t read that yet
Shellhas joined
jonas’
I think in Germany, you can do that; contracts with employers typically have something similar
mukt2has left
pep.
hmm that's a good point. I don't know to what extent one can bend french law to make this a reality though
mukt2has joined
pep.
labor law*. I think it's also possible but I don't know if submitting a XEP would fall under labor law :P