-
Guus
I'm getting feature requests from two different, seemingly unrelated end users to 'prevent people from leaving a chat' (which I interpret as instructing a client to hide leave/close options in the UI). Have others received similar requests?
-
MattJ
Not that I'm aware of
-
Zash
Closest I can think of is read-only autojoin bookmarks
-
emus
I just need to think of that Clockwork Organe scene^^
-
Guus
Zash it's explicitly not (just) that (that was my first thought too)
-
mdosch
> I just need to think of that Clockwork Organe scene^^ Don't toltschok your users, drug.
-
emus
toltschok? what? 😅
-
Zash
Guus: I mean, people have asked for "make all users be in this chatroom", tho I don't remember anything about preventing them from leaving. Could have been implied, haven't heard such requests in a while.
-
mdosch
> toltschok? what? 😅 I thought you read clockwork orange. 🤨
-
mdosch
Seems it's tolchok https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:A_Clockwork_Orange#T
-
emus
wow
-
theTedd
Guus, I suspect it may be as bad as that: they want to prevent people from leaving; I'm guessing the reason behind it is they want a persistent communication channel, and that's one way they can see it working, so that's what they suggest.
-
mdosch
If those people use conversations which joins every MUC automatically on invite this would be terrible.
-
theTedd
it's obviously a misuse of muc/chatrooms, but it solves the problem from their point of view in a way they can understand; there are better alternatives, but they're not aware those are possible
-
theTedd
people tend to have a problem, look for a solution, and then ask for help with the solution, instead of explaining the problem and asking for a good solution
-
Zash
The old X/Y problem?
-
theTedd
exactly
-
theTedd
it's probaby worth confirming with them what it is they actually want (the problem they want to solve) - ask for an example instead of an explanation
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, can I get a quick formal ack? https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/990
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: 👍
-
jonas’
thx
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: is that related to an eventual Last Call?
- jonas’ scratches head
-
jonas’
good question
-
Ge0rG
I wonder when is the best place to sneak in XEP-0393
-
jonas’
formally, I can’t merge this as an LC is to be in progress
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: isn't an LC a matter of asking an editor?
-
jonas’
no
-
jonas’
> The Approving Body must agree that the XEP is ready to be considered for advancement. Once the Approving Body so agrees, it shall instruct the XMPP Extensions Editor to (1) change the status of the XEP from Experimental (or Deferred) to Proposed and (2) issue a Last Call for open discussion on the Standards list. The Last Call shall expire not less than fourteen (14) days after the date of issue.
-
jonas’
I’m going to go with the intent of the approving body here, which was to gather early feedback, and including the A/V section will help with getting useful feedback
-
Ge0rG
Yes.
-
Ge0rG
I'm sure that all of Council were aware of the pending addition of AV