> Guus:
> 2023-02-07 08:04 (GMT+01:00)
> If (I'm not saying it is) we deem it important for XMPP to be well represented, maybe the XSF can consider funding people (eg: council and board members) to attend meetings like these.
+1
Mjolnir Archonhas joined
KitKat::new()has joined
brunrobehas joined
Marandahas joined
eevvoorhas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
Skull Fuckerhas left
emus
> MattJ:
> 2023-02-07 08:21 (GMT+01:00)
> I'm not saying there isn't more we can do (there always will be), but it's not like we're doing nothing
I used to claim we should move from the passive corner to the active one
Skull Fuckerhas joined
emus
in general, no saying folks are not invsting time. But for me it feels often limited to resources
BASSGODhas joined
BASSGODhas left
Maxencehas joined
chipmnkhas joined
emus
Daniel: I think it will be moved by one week
Daniel
emus: yes thank you. I saw the emails
emus
Daniel: ok
KitKat::new()has left
brunrobehas left
Mjolnir Archonhas left
Marandahas left
djorzhas joined
BASSGODhas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
Titihas joined
sonnyhas left
resolihas left
marmarperhas joined
sonnyhas joined
no_1729has left
Sevehas left
Sevehas joined
Yagizahas joined
LNJhas joined
stphas joined
arcxihas left
arcxihas joined
paulhas joined
no_1729has joined
djorzhas left
Yagizahas left
Patigahas joined
goffihas joined
Yagizahas joined
sonnyhas left
projjalmhas left
Andrzejhas joined
Kevhas joined
sonnyhas joined
karoshihas joined
jcbrandhas left
jcbrandhas joined
roothas left
flow
I always assumed that the XSF not doing more which money is that there is no-one really taking care of financial stuff in the XSF (besides the absolute minimum that is required to keep the org going). has that changed or is my assumption wrong?✎
flow
I always assumed that the XSF not doing more which money is because there is no-one really taking care of financial stuff in the XSF (besides the absolute minimum that is required to keep the org going). has that changed or is my assumption wrong? ✏
Guus
My assumption is that these are two sides of the same coin.
jonas’
I think our treasurer expressed quite explicitly that they're happy in using the money if we have good ideas how
jonas’
(which are acceptable under the regulations the XSF is under)
rubihas joined
marmarperhas left
Kevhas left
Yagizahas left
SteveFhas joined
MattJ
Yeah, we don't need much money if we don't spend it. If people have concrete proposals (i.e. including amounts) then we can decide if that's something we want to allocate resources for. The only such proposal in my memory in recent years was paying someone to do social media and community management stuff, and that did not get approval.
Andrzejhas left
lskdjfhas joined
Yagizahas joined
Kevhas joined
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
thats too bad
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
xmpp could use more outreach
Daniel
MattJ: did the XSF pay for you to go to IETF London? I'm honestly asking because I don't know. If they did I think this should have been communicated more clearly (as a good thing)
Guus
MattJ: Oh, I didn't know that. Do you remember what were the reasonings for both the ask, as for the disapproval?
jonas’
Daniel, I got reimbursement for the remote IETF participation fwiw
Kevhas left
Daniel
jonas’: OK good to know. I know that it was discussed. But I wasn't sure if it had actually happened
Daniel
Plus the XSF paid for the conference room for summit (although I'm also a bit confused on how and when that actually got decided)
Daniel
So it's not like the XSF never pays for anything
rubihas left
Daniel
If we want to attract sponsors in the future we should communicate more openly on what we spend our money
miruxhas left
Guus
I think that better communication would be a good thing, but I don't think it'd matter much to potential sponsors. Most of them likely do not care, as long as we're not spending it on things like sponsoring the Taliban.
flow
I fondly remember the days when there were regular blog posts about XSF income and expenses
Andrzejhas joined
Trunghas left
Trunghas joined
rubihas joined
rubihas left
Andrzejhas left
miruxhas joined
stphas left
Guus
any blog posts, really. The newsletter is most excellent, but it would be nice if that was not the lion share of the blog. I fully realize that I myself can help fix that by submitting blog post content...
robertooohas joined
Daniel
I think emus and team have been doing a very good job wrt PR lately.
rubihas joined
sjmhas left
Daniel
it's just the income+expenses that are missing and i don’t think that's the comm teams fault
Guus
I in no way want to suggest otherwise.
sjmhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
Kevhas joined
Daniel
plus before Covid we had a sprint budget that I think we got to used once before the pandemic ruined everything
Guus
I don't agree that this is all that's missing. We used to do a lot more with the blog - post about elections, board goals, etc.
Daniel: it was agreed that the XSF would fund my IETF attendance, yes. Have I actually submitted the expenses yet? No... 😅
Andrzejhas joined
MattJ
I am hoping the XSF will also cover at least some of the cost of the printing I did for FOSDEM
MattJ
SCAM has a budget, but it was obviously exceeded this year due to the conference room
Vaulorhas left
Vaulorhas joined
Andrzejhas left
Yagizahas left
Guus
Assuming that the printing was all XSF-related and printing costs were within reasonable ranges (conforming to regular prices), I'd hope that you'd be 100% reimbursed.
Daniel
when the scam budget was allocated we did not account having to pay for a the venues. the scam budget was/is for printing and maybe some snacks
Vaulorhas left
MattJ
Yeah
Daniel
so i would hope that the conference room either doesn’t come out of the scam budget or the scam budget will get raised significantly
Guus
iirc the SCAM budget was 1000 euro / year. I truly have no idea what a conference room costs, but was it over that?
Daniel
a little over 2k
Guus
wowza
MattJ
The budget IIRC was set in USD, and the conference room was 2k EUR
Guus
oh, you are probably right.
Sevehas left
intosi
At least we got a lot of entertainment out of the coffee machine and the proprietary app required for connecting to the projector.
MattJ
I never did get my hot chocolate
Zash
Demand a refund!
intosi
I think the machine rejected the notion of it also having to deal with chocolate.
Daniel
I actually think it would make sense to give summit it's own budget. because for normal sprints I think it is reasonable to have he sprint host organize some sort of venue. while summit needs it's own 'proper' venue✎
MattJ
Guus [09:25]:
> Assuming that the printing was all XSF-related and printing costs were within reasonable ranges (conforming to regular prices), I'd hope that you'd be 100% reimbursed.
Some are clearly XSF (newsletter, etc.), but what about project-specific materials?
Sevehas joined
Daniel
I actually think it would make sense to give summit it's own budget. because for normal sprints I think it is reasonable to have the sprint host organize some sort of venue. while summit needs it's own 'proper' venue ✏
stphas joined
Vaulorhas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
Guus
MattJ: I'm not sure if there's precedent for project-specific materials. To me, it would be not out of the question to reimburse for that, but maybe there's an argument to be had there. As for XSF-specific stuff, that's a no-brainer to me: 100% reimbursement.
Yagizahas joined
Daniel
I’m sure the XSF benefited from the fact that there was marketing material at the XSF booth even if some of it was project specific.
Daniel
so unless you want to get reimbursted for the life size plush snikket you had made I'd say it's probably fine
jonas’
excuse me what there was a plush
MattJ
No 😂
chipmnkhas left
Guus
From what I could find from what I asked to be reimbursed and received from the XSF in the past, that excluded project-specific stuff, but did include things like the XMPP-logo sticker, the XMPP flags, taxis to/from the XSF dinner and some lunches at the summit.
chipmnkhas joined
Guus
I'm a bit ambivalent on reimbursement for project-specific stuff. Where do we draw a clear line?
Guus
or: do we offer something like this to all members / member projects?
Daniel
I wasn’t at fosdem so I don’t know what MattJ is refering to. but what i meant to say that the 'newsletter' he made for example is fine
Daniel
the 10ft banner "snikket is awesome" maybe not
Guus
generic stuff is fine to me. But Prosody stickers? hmm.
MattJ
Yes, the newsletter, client comparison chart, some leaflets introducing/explaining XMPP
Guus
How do you see those as 'project-specific' ?
MattJ
Alongside that I printed materials for Movim, Snikket and Cheogram
Guus
ah. :)
antranigvhas joined
antranigvhas left
MattJ
Also some stuff from freie-messenger.de
rubihas joined
Vaulorhas left
Vaulorhas joined
SteveFhas joined
restive_monkhas left
restive_monkhas joined
Guus
oh, I didn't realize that you printed project-specific stuff for many projects.
Guus
Did you volunteer that, or did those projects ask you? If the latter, maybe look at them first, for reimbursement?
Guus
Otherwise, I'd personally be more comfortable not getting this from the XSF (especially since this is an after-the-facts kind of thing). I would be willing to split the bill with you personally though, as bottom line, this helped the community.
MattJ
So the background is that last year^Wtime, I printed some Snikket leaflets and brought them with me
MattJ
There was almost nothing else at the stand
MattJ
This year I didn't want that to happen, so I made some generic XMPP stuff, and I told folk that if they sent me materials I would get them printed at the same time when I went to the print shop
Guus
Thank you.
jonas’
I'm with Guus, basically, including the "splitting the bill" part, the more the merrier.
MattJ
I'm happy with the results, we had a range of materials available and it was significantly easier to explain XMPP and how it's an ecosystem of software and services
jonas’
but I think it would also be good if board had a discussion how this can be improved for the next event; I think having materials there is a good thing™ and giving projects implementing XSF standards an opportunity to present themselves with a small budget supported by the XSF to improve the XSF stand, seems sensible.
jonas’
but I get that a post-fact thing may be a bit irritating to onlookers
MattJ
If I absolutely needed to know the XSF would cover the expenses I would have sought budget approval in advance, or just not done it, but TBH it's fine either way, I don't regret doing it and there wasn't a lot of time to spend discussion specifics✎
MattJ
If I absolutely needed to know the XSF would cover the expenses I would have sought budget approval in advance, or just not done it, but TBH it's fine either way, I don't regret doing it and there wasn't a lot of time to spend discussing specifics ✏
jgarthas left
antranigvhas joined
MattJ
In my mind when I planned it, there was the SCAM budget. But with the surprise last-minute expense of the conference room I understand that this year was a little different to usual with regards to cost.
govanifyhas left
govanifyhas joined
MattJ
Oh, and I also bought the leaflet holders, which are now packed in the XSF's FOSDEM boxes
KitKat::new()has joined
MattJ
That was because the year *before* 2020 we'd actually had quite limited space on the stand, with too many materials and demos taking up space on one table
Guus
Again, thank you. I definitely want you to be reimbursed, as I admire what you did and think it added a lot of value. I'd just prefer to not have the project-specific stuff be reimbursed through the XSF - but I'll help you cover those costs. That's maybe a bit more of a hassle with splitting bills, but will still get you what I hope you'll find fairly reimbursed.
MattJ
Nah, I don't mind, we can call it a donation to the ecosystem :)
MattJ
I don't see a clear way for the XSF to start funding project specific stuff without it becoming a minefield (wait until Isode want stuff printed... :) )
jonas’
literal minefield, I see.
MattJ
Haha
MattJ
Just an example, that it's not only open-source projects in the ecosystem
Guus
Well, we could device some sort of 'budget-for-marketing-for-member-projects' scheme - that could be fair-ish, and beneficial to in particular the smaller projects.
Kev
In fact, I think that most of the XSF's money has come from non-OSS projects (or freemium OSS projects).
Guus
but lets get that in place _before_ spending the money :)
jonas’
if it's just a few bucks for flyers and those are at the XSF stand, and are positive (i.e. no degarotary statements about competitors or so), I think I wouldn't have an issue with that.
MattJ
Kev, and the people providing that money wanted it to support other non-OSS/freemium projects? :)
Kev
> , and the people providing that money wanted it to support other non-OSS/freemium projects? :)
Oh, I doubt it. Just reminding folks.
Kev
Or, well, not *only* such projects.
Kev
A rising tide, all boats, floating, etc.
marmarperhas joined
praveenhas joined
sonnyhas left
KitKat::new()has left
Guus
Is Kev going nautical on us?
sonnyhas joined
intosi
Aye.
roothas joined
Steve Killehas left
marmarperhas left
rubihas left
rubihas joined
Steve Killehas joined
jgarthas joined
Trunghas left
Trunghas joined
Trunghas left
Trunghas joined
Kev
I'm not naughty, I'm a good boy.
Guus
I'm resisting an urge to comment.
Guus
let's just say that I think a blue/white striped shirt would look good on intosi.
jgarthas left
intosi
🤨
lovetoxhas left
ralphmhas joined
Dele Olajidehas joined
restive_monkhas left
ralphm
The costs for FOSDEM/Summit generally include the van, taxis, and materials for the booth/lounge. That's what we allocated the SCAM budget for (among other events, of course). The costs for the venue were indeed new, and as we had a majority of board members in agreement that we should do that, knowing the costs, I went ahead. I don't consider it part of the SCAM budget. Some details were shared on the board mailing list, and Peter also requested to send in the invoices after event (as usual). So yes we didn't have an explicit board meeting on this, but I will definitely include it in our next meeting.
ralphm
Everything about organizing this was not very well done, and I'm sure we'll do better next year.
Zash
Understandable, given the time since last time :)
ralphm
As for funding things in general and the lack of attempts to get sponsors, is basically because not much happened that required additional funds. I think this will change dramatically this year.
restive_monkhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
rubihas left
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
Vaulorhas left
rubihas joined
Maxencehas left
Maxencehas joined
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
uhoreghas left
homebeachhas left
lovetoxhas joined
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
no_1729has left
Menelhas left
jgarthas joined
Menelhas joined
Vaulorhas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
antranigvhas left
antranigvhas joined
antranigvhas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
antranigvhas joined
intosihas left
intosihas joined
rubihas left
rubihas joined
Vaulorhas left
gooyahas left
gooyahas joined
Guus
In Stream Management, what is the expected behavior when a peer sends a 'h' value that is _lower_ than the value that it sent previously?
Vaulorhas joined
praveenhas left
Zash
fatal stream error, disconnect
Maranda[x]has joined
intosi
Technically there's rollover, but that would mean the server is acking 2**32-small_n stanzas, which should also lead to that stream error.
Guus
Lol
Guus
I hadn't thought of that
flow
if a stream mangement participant acks more stanzas that where send then this should lead to a stream error
flow
because either the acking participant counted wrong, or the participant that send the stanzas
Zash
There's a bug, it should be reported and fixed.
flow
you could potentially implement a robost mode that simply deactivates/ignores further sm related actions, but that is rarely useful✎
flow
you could potentially implement a robust mode that simply deactivates/ignores further sm related actions, but that is rarely useful ✏
The peer acks not more, but less stanzas in my question
Trunghas left
flow
but yes, we are all on the same page that a stream error is the right thing to do™
Guus
Less than it acked earlier
intosi
No, it acks more, because rollover.
flow
Guus, what intosi said
Guus
Right
sonnyhas left
flow
you can not unack stanzas, the ack counter is only ever going forward, with the technicnal limitation that its a uint32 with defined overflow semantics
intosi
So if your rollover logic is working, the stream error should follow naturally.
Zash
Is anyone testing rollover? :)
intosi
Zash: we are :).
flow
testing? dunno, but IIRC smack has code for it
Trunghas joined
Guus
We apparently have broken rollover code, because it did not catch this
Zash
I fear we might not have rollover handling at all 😱️
no_1729has joined
flow
dos vector detected
Zash
it would take DoS levels of stanzas to reach it anyway, right? 🤷️
marmarperhas left
flow
I didn't say "fast dos vector detected" :)
intosi
Or very long lived connections that keep resuming indefinitely. Reaching 2**32 stanzas will take a while though ;-).
intosi
connections -> sessions.
Zash
I'd expect either you get a stream error, or it continues until around 2⁵³ and experience Weirdness, or wrap around at 2⁶⁴. Mmmmm number types, so much fun.
sonnyhas joined
Zash
Hm, are there error conditions for mis-count bugs?
Zash
We use `undefined-condition` with some text
intosi
Assuming your peer doesn't cut you off because you didn't send a u32.
intosi
Example 16 has an error for that.
intosi
(it's defined in the text right above it.)
Zash
Oh when did `handled-count-too-high` appear?
no_1729has left
Rebeldhas joined
intosi
Didn't check, but "recent".
intosi
Guus committed that in 2018.
moparisthebest
> The budget IIRC was set in USD, and the conference room was 2k EUR
Luckily that's the same these days lol
paulhas left
Mario Sabatinohas left
Andrzejhas joined
Mario Sabatinohas joined
Andrzejhas left
Andrzejhas joined
xnamedhas left
xnamedhas joined
rubihas left
rubihas joined
paulhas joined
sjmhas left
Vaulorhas left
resolihas joined
Andrzejhas left
rubihas left
rubihas joined
rubihas left
rubihas joined
SteveFhas left
Andrzejhas joined
Vidakhas left
Vaulorhas joined
marmarperhas joined
no_1729has joined
Yagizahas left
Guus
Exchange rates are well on their way to be back to the old levels, I noticed when I last did my invoicing.
marmarperhas left
Andrzejhas left
Daniel
Guus: do you invoice in your customers currency?
Zashcries in SEK
no_1729has left
arcxihas left
paulhas left
adiaholichas left
Guus
Daniel: only for (some) Americans. Some stereotypes aren't pulled out of thin air...
jonas’
*US Americans, I assume
Guus
Oh yes.
pep.
Dunno if it's been seen, I'll ask again. There are people in Asia around here right? Even if not an XSF member. That can be sent to an IETF meeting in Japan. It'd only be fair that the XSF makes an effort to encourage local people to go I feel, instead or in addition to volunteers from other places.
Guus
For some reason, the larger that the organisation is, the _less_ likely that they're aware that something exists outside of the USA.
SteveFhas joined
jonas’
Guus, is that a reflection of your customers, or a reply to pep.?
Guus
No argument here, pep.
Guus
a reflection of dealing with _some_ of my US-based customers.
Daniel
pep.: I generally agree with you. For IETF though I feel like this should be somebody that is rather close to the XSF
Guus
I've had large orgs sent me a check. My local bank was amazed. :)
Guus
(also, home-made cookies. I did not forward those to my local bank though)
sjmhas joined
Zashcries in invoicing system that could mail invoices XOR send EUR invoices
Daniel
Like for normal conferences to staff booths or give talks we shouldn't fly someone to the other side of the world
SteveFhas left
Daniel
Not just because money but also because of that thing called climate change
jonas’
s/change/catastrophy/
pep.
Daniel, I don't know. I think that would also be best, but I think there needs some kind of bootstrapping happening. Something something chicken/egg
jonas’
bootstrapping by throwing someone into an IETF meeting sounds harsh
pep.
:D
jonas’
I've attended the MIMI session remotely and it was pretty arcane to me
arcxihas joined
jonas’
and I *am* close to the XSF, or at least I'd think I'm above the median
pep.
And yeah, preferring local people for that thing called climate something
Guus
Zash: my invoicing system is a set of text files, Libreoffice to generate a PDF, and email. Takes me about 1.5 hours/month. I do not see automation pay for itself there.
Daniel
We should find ways to encourage sprints and/or conference participation outside Europe. But I feel like IETF is the worst place to do that
pep.
I agree with sprints.
pep.
I don't know re IETF. I'm not going to die on this hill but I think it's important that we at least make an effort in this direction. And if it's not (yet?) possible then fine
jonas’
someone™ could send a mail to members@
no_1729has joined
pep.
(not me, I'm not in there anymore :p)
Half-Shothas left
uhoreghas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
adiaholichas joined
pep.
I may have asked already, does anybody handle see-other-host?
pep.
Or gone, with a pointer to some other place
jonas’
I know that see-other-host is used by tigase clustering
paulhas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marmarperhas joined
singpolymahas left
paulhas left
no_1729has left
inkyhas left
paulhas joined
singpolymahas joined
Maranda[x]has left
Maxencehas left
Maxencehas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
arcxihas left
Patigahas left
marmarperhas left
projjalmhas joined
resolihas left
resolihas joined
Yagizahas joined
Andrzejhas joined
inkyhas joined
inkyhas left
inkyhas joined
arcxihas joined
Maxencehas left
Maxencehas joined
Andrzej
yes, Tigase is using see-other-host and our software is using it
Andrzej
also gone is used to communicate that cluster node is being shutdown
pep.
I would kind of see more of these redirects supported in clients. I should open issues here and there
jonas’
just be careful to not introduce security issues with those…
singpolymahas left
pep.
Well they're in the protocol already..
jonas’
e.g. following a <see-other-host/> before TLS is probably a bad idea
pep.
Probably
jonas’
unless you enforce the same certificate name bindings on the destination as you would've on the source
pep.
Or is it. You can still check the certificate on the dest
pep.
:)
jonas’
but a naive implementation wouldn't do that as you have to carry the information that you came from a redirect and which redirect you came from along
Mikaelahas left
Andrzejhas left
no_1729has joined
jgarthas left
Maxencehas left
Maxencehas joined
singpolymahas joined
Patigahas joined
Andrzejhas joined
jgarthas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
Andrzejhas left
SteveFhas joined
SteveFhas left
SteveFhas joined
jgarthas left
Andrzejhas joined
Andrzejhas left
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
resolihas left
resolihas joined
intosihas left
intosihas joined
marmarperhas joined
Half-Shothas left
uhoreghas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
Andrzejhas joined
Andrzejhas left
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
djorzhas joined
marc0shas left
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
marc0shas joined
Ingolfhas left
Ingolfhas joined
intosihas left
intosihas joined
singpolymahas left
resolihas left
singpolymahas joined
marmarperhas left
Maranda[x]has joined
Wojtekhas joined
stphas left
Menelhas left
Menelhas joined
praveenhas joined
Ingolfhas left
Ingolfhas joined
Sevehas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
Sevehas joined
Wojtekhas left
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
jgarthas joined
MattJ
MIX-capable clients? Siskin and an old branch of Conversations?
no_1729has left
Mikaelahas joined
moparisthebesthas left
moparisthebesthas joined
no_1729has joined
Daniel
It's probably a bit of a stretch to call that branch mix-capable
govanifyhas left
Steve Killehas left
djorzhas left
MattJ
A bit of a stretch or a lot of stretch? Just having something capable of joining would be a start
MattJ
Alternatively I may need to write a test client
govanifyhas joined
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
kaidan also has a branch but not at working condition eiter
Daniel
Joining (via direct join not PAM) receiving and sending basic messages and showing participants if a recall correctly.
Daniel
But depending on when or where you want to play around with mix it might make more sense to start from scratch based on C3
Zash
Did we ever define a MUC style direct full resource join?
Zash
IIRC it was mentioned as a potential transition step for PAM-less servers
Daniel
Depends on what you mean by muc style but IIRC Conversations only does that
Sevehas left
Sevehas joined
Daniel
Ah never mind. I'm wrong I think
Titihas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
no_1729has left
MattJ
Where is the PAM-less join specified?
MattJ
So far I have only found text stating that PAM is required
Kev
I don't know if it made it into any of the specs yet. I'm fairly sure, without checking, it was just for the client to send to the server the same stanza (but full rather than bare JID) that the server would have sent.✎
Kev
I don't know if it made it into any of the specs yet. I'm fairly sure, without checking, it was just for the client to send to the room the same stanza (but full rather than bare JID) that the server would have sent on the user's behalf. ✏
MattJ
My cursory reading suggests it isn't in the spec, indeed
Daniel
does it even make a lot of sense to do backward compat that way? if MUC isn’t going anywhere for a while and you want legacy clients to still join your server via MUC then clients that support mix but have server that don’t use mix-pam can fall back to muc
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
Daniel
i'm not saying don’t spec it but as a client developer having one way to join a mix room and if that doesn’t work fall back to muc seems simpler
MattJ
Makes sense
Zash
It also makes sense if you have MUC code and want to bolt MIX protocol handling on top of it
Zash
So you can do full or bare JID joins, with MUC or MIX syntax .... mmmmm multiplication :S
tbm16has joined
MattJ
Okay, I'm confused. What does the participant server need to implement?
MattJ
You'd think this question would be answered, not raised, by "XEP-0405: Mediated Information eXchange (MIX): Participant Server Requirements"
Zash
With full JID joins, nothing
Zash
With bare JID joins, PAM?
MattJ
I looked at PAM, but the syntax and namespace is different
Zash
Oh no
MattJ
so I have to implement both?
MattJ
It's not clear
Kev
Which namespaces are different? I can easily believe that splitting the specs has led to updates not propagating to all of them.
Daniel
yes as someone who wants to join a mix room my server has to support 405
Daniel
when i join a mix i sent a <client-join channel="room-on-other-domain"/> to my account
Daniel
so there would probably be a mod_mix_pam and a mod_mix
Maxencehas left
MattJ
For example: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0405.html#example-4 has the client sending stuff to its own server in the 'urn:xmpp:mix:pam:2' namespace, but XEP-0376 only has 'urn:xmpp:pam:0'
Steve Killehas joined
Maxencehas joined
Daniel
i think it is relatively save to ignore pam
stphas joined
Daniel
you only need mix-pam
Kev
376 and MIX are independent.
Daniel
> In future, this specification MAY be incorporated into Pubsub Account Management (XEP-0376) [4] (PAM) which follows a similar model.
MAY
future...
Kev
You shouldn't* need anything from 376, just what's in 369 and related.
[* But, of course ... ]
MattJ
Aha
MattJ
Okay, so when people talk about PAM they mean MIX-PAM and PAM is an attempt to make it generic that nobody actually uses right now
MattJ
(correct me if I'm wrong)
Daniel
well sometimes when people talk about PAM they mean PAM
Daniel
but in the context of mix they mean mix-pam
Kev
PAM the idea came first, for use with 60 pubsub.
When MIX the idea came along, using the same model seemed to make sense, so people used the same term.
Kev
As I recall.
Daniel
yes
Daniel
that's how i remember it too
Kev
So you could think of it as "60 PAM" and "MIX PAM" if you liked.
Daniel
is PAM a thing in the UK by the way?
MattJ
Clear as mud :)
MattJ
I'm worried this will make sense to me one day
Wojtekhas left
MattJ
Pluggable authentication modules?
Daniel
the cooking spray
Zash
mod_auth_pam_mix?
MattJ
Not that I'm aware
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
Maxencehas left
Maxencehas joined
no_1729has joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
atomicwatchhas left
no_1729has left
Ingolfhas left
marmarperhas joined
BASSGODhas left
no_1729has joined
Wojtekhas joined
papatutuwawahas joined
gooyahas left
gooyahas joined
Sevehas left
Sevehas joined
petrescatraianhas left
Guus
Curious: does anyone happen to know if XMPP is used in the world of railways / rolling stock? I keep finding job offers that are not really specific for XMPP, but do mention it, from companies that seem operate in that business. Multiple countries, even, Italy, the UK.
Menelhas left
Menelhas joined
Guus
oh, digging through the the layer of recruiters, this all seems to boil down to Hitachi Rail Limited.
> Your search for 'xmpp' has returned 0 results:
Did one expect results?
Menel
Ah, didn't read the above messages.
Guus
There's one mention in this paper - I'm not sure if it's related to Hitachi, but mentions real-time monitoring of rolling stock over XMPP, I think: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326316004_The_railway_predictive_maintenance_and_the_enabling_role_of_the_Internet_of_Things
Guus
anyways, just curious.
no_1729has left
Guus
dinnertime! byes!
Zash
disco#items rail car contents? mmmmmmmmmm
petrescatraianhas joined
marmarperhas joined
chipmnkhas left
chipmnkhas joined
marmarperhas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
Menelhas left
Menelhas joined
Steve Killehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
Andrzejhas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
neshtaxmpphas left
neshtaxmpphas joined
Andrzejhas left
no_1729has joined
resolihas joined
projjalmhas left
Steve Killehas joined
Mikaelahas left
Andrzejhas joined
adiaholichas left
Mikaelahas joined
Andrzejhas left
no_1729has left
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
adiaholichas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Wojtekhas left
kinetikhas left
Wojtekhas joined
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
praveenhas left
flashcorehas left
no_1729has joined
kinetikhas joined
inkyhas left
djorzhas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
flashcorehas joined
gooyahas left
gooyahas joined
no_1729has left
jabberjockehas joined
jabberjockehas left
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
atomicwatchhas joined
jgarthas left
Wojtekhas left
nuronhas left
nuronhas joined
marmarperhas joined
snowhas joined
jcbrandhas left
jcbrandhas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobihas left
Tobihas joined
Tobiashas joined
pep.
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0309.html anybody using the 'urn:xmpp:public-server' NS defined in there? What does 'public' mean exactly?
twisted firestarterhas left
moparisthebest
I'd say that means not private
pep.
👏️
moparisthebest
> The server is a public node on the XMPP network
moparisthebest
Good question though, that's all I see
pep.
Yeah, it's defining a word by using that same word
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Wojtekhas joined
paulhas joined
chipmnkhas left
chipmnkhas joined
marmarperhas left
pep.
wurstsalat, emus, where can we talk about providers.xmpp.net? https://codeberg.org/joinjabber/collective/issues/15
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
jgarthas joined
emus
> MattJ:
> 2023-02-08 09:47 (GMT+01:00)
> Yeah, we don't need much money if we don't spend it. If people have concrete proposals (i.e. including amounts) then we can decide if that's something we want to allocate resources for. The only such proposal in my memory in recent years was paying someone to do social media and community management stuff, and that did not get approval.
and one other certain topic 😊
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Ingolfhas left
emus
pep.: in our repo? or what do you mean?
I recommend to wait until we are done with automation and new parameters perhaps
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
MattJ
I know of two topics where money has been proposed as a solution: infrastructure and editor tooling. Neither had concrete proposals :)
Zash
Maybe we should throw money on coming up with proposals?
paulhas left
emus
> Daniel:
> 2023-02-08 10:06 (GMT+01:00)
> I think emus and team have been doing a very good job wrt PR lately.
thanks Daniel 🧡
jgarthas left
emus
> MattJ:
> 2023-02-08 07:20 (GMT+01:00)
> I know of two topics where money has been proposed as a solution: infrastructure and editor tooling. Neither had concrete proposals :)
We had tasks, effort and amount of money specified
pep.
MattJ, fwiw, questions concerning money I've had in the past have been shot down rather quickly, or left completely unanswered, so yeah there hasn't been much concrete stuff proposed.. :/
paulhas joined
MattJ
emus, okay, you're right. But you know I can't get into this topic again... :)
pep.
emus, I mean stuff that could be common to both our projects that we could help with
pep.
We'd help on the technical bits if there's a way we can reuse the list, or even just the tooling
zonsopkomsthas left
zonsopkomsthas joined
pep.
Is there a place that isn't here maybe where we can discuss this?
wladmishas left
wladmishas joined
emus
> ralphm:
> 2023-02-08 11:46 (GMT+01:00)
> Everything about organizing this was not very well done, and I'm sure we'll do better next year.
Yes! Certainly in!
moparisthebest
"I would want servers that dont accept fascists and such." Yes only list servers where the admin has to interview the new user before allowing them to sign up 🤣
resolihas left
pep.
moparisthebest, ..
davidhas joined
davidhas left
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
emus
> MattJ:
> 2023-02-08 07:24 (GMT+01:00)
> emus, okay, you're right. But you know I can't get into this topic again... :)
I know and cry :-)
moparisthebest
The worst part about that site is users hear about this great XMPP thing and type joinxmpp.org and are immediately confused about what this jabber thing is
Seve
True
jgarthas joined
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
oh the xmpp vs jabber again XD
pep.
Yeah whatever. As long as we use either XMPP or Jabber there will be issues with that anyway
emus
> pep.:
> 2023-02-08 07:25 (GMT+01:00)
> We'd help on the technical bits if there's a way we can reuse the list, or even just the tooling
you can reuse the list already if you want
pep.
emus, I don't just want to reuse the list, we don't want to be passive about it
Dele Olajidehas left
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
the interest is the gathered data from the server. and how to automate that said data
Ingolfhas joined
moparisthebest
pep.: Why not host a copy of the website with s/jabber/XMPP/ on joinxmpp.org ? Then no one will be confused
moparisthebest
Can be trivially automated, I'll do it if you want
pep.
So we're alternatively named JoinJabber and JoinXMPP? And we also bridge chatrooms? :)
resolihas joined
moparisthebest
Just hiding them behind appropriate links would be enough I think
pep.
meh
pep.
I know I'm quick to jump into bikeshed discussions, but this is too much
moparisthebest
Type in jabber.org or jabber.com into a browser like a new user might
moparisthebest
xmpp.org works
moparisthebest
Jabber still exists as a Cisco product that isn't quite XMPP, it's past time to let it go, I can't in good conscience link people to joinjabber
pep.
Yes yes
pep.
Then don't
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
well you already dont like the CoC we have so
egnunhas left
egnunhas joined
emus
> pep.:
> 2023-02-08 07:41 (GMT+01:00)
> emus, I don't just want to reuse the list, we don't want to be passive about it
Ok, but then propose in the gitlab repo, we dont have a channel yet
pep.
emus, ok
moparisthebest
MSavoritias (fae,ve): no I have no problem with that, I just think "not allowing fascists to register" is an absurd and impossible task, it's perfectly fine to have not banning bad users as a reason for list removal in the CoC but wording it like that isn't helpful
moparisthebest
Unless you have some suggestions for actually preventing fascists from registering in the first place I'm unaware of?
uhoreghas left
Half-Shothas left
Matthewhas left
homebeachhas left
Half-Shothas joined
Matthewhas joined
homebeachhas joined
uhoreghas joined
pep.
moparisthebest, where have you seen this btw?
moparisthebest
pep.: The issue you linked
snow
What does NG stand for in XEP-0409?
MattJ
Next Generation
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
oh. thats in progress think. we havent decided on the exact wording yet
pep.
moparisthebest, so a random comment that isn't a concrete proposal?
moparisthebest
Yes
pep.
moparisthebest, ok get lost please
pep.
And I'll leave it at this
moparisthebest
Don't get me wrong I really like everything you all are doing over there *except* using the wrong name and holding joinxmpp.org hostage which could be easily remedied
moparisthebest
If you don't want comments on your CoC proposals maybe don't bring it up in this room :)
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pep.
You know you're just playing on words here and you seem happy about it
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
thats not the CoC even ><
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
so you are wrong on that too
MattJ
moparisthebest, this isn't the right place to discuss this (if there even is one). I feel your comment is picking the least favourable interpretation. It's possible to have a policy and enforce that policy on a best-effort basis, even if it's not possible to vet every user and every message. Abuse reports are a thing.
stpeterhas joined
MattJ
As for Jabber/XMPP, we'll never settle that one either. Just let them be.
moparisthebest
Right, I believe I said as much, at least I tried to
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
moparisthebest
XMPP/Jabber is settled, search it on any search engine, the top result is Cisco jabber which last I heard wasn't even compatible with XMPP
pep.
That's just like.. your opinion
moparisthebest
What part is opinion
moparisthebest
Wikipedia doesn't even know what it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabber
MattJ
The part about Cisco Jabber appearing first is fact. The part about Jabber therefore being unusable is opinion.
pep.
Ah sorry you're the incarnation of neutrality and fact again, I forgot :)✎
pep.
Ah sorry you're the incarnation of neutrality and facts again, I forgot :) ✏
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
moparisthebest
MattJ: fair
no_1729has joined
pep.
also Cisco Jabber appearing first is Google's opinion :-°
moparisthebest
And ddg, and bing
pep.
Still an opinion
MattJ
Differences of opinion are normal and okay. We don't need to fight it out. If you don't want to participate in the joinjabber project, that's totally fine. We don't need to know :)
moparisthebest
I guess you have to ask yourself who you are trying to get on XMPP, people already here for decades who know what jabber is, or people who haven't heard of either jabber or XMPP
Trunghas left
pep.
moparisthebest, we get it, you disagree
moparisthebest
So what about my offer to automate changing the text at joinjabber.org to XMPP when viewed at joinxmpp.org ? Don't need to answer now it's a standing offer
pep.
There's xmpp:chat@joinjabber.org?join if you're serious about it and if it's not just a one-off. I'm not the only one to decide, but I already feel like it's going to be a pain
stphas left
mjkhas left
moparisthebest
Got it, I'll work up a POC and propose it there, thanks
Seve
Great!
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
pep.
I think it's such a waste to focus on the name when the interest of this project is something else, but whatever
Wojtekhas left
Daniel
I like what you are doing with joinjabber. Website looks great
stpeterhas left
pep.
Thanks! That's a lot of work from Kris for the migration. And Line and Guillaume for the graphics :)
miruxhas left
miruxhas joined
Tobiashas left
mjkhas joined
Tobiashas joined
no_1729has left
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
KitKat::new()has joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
wurstsalat
Hi XEP people! I'd like to hear your comments on this XEP lifecycle diagram:
It looks like the normal transition would be Experimental -> Deferred -> Proposed
wurstsalat
like this?
MattJ
Deferred should be an exception state (although it's certainly a common one), the normal transition would be Experimental -> Proposed, if you're trying to explain the lifecycle to someone
antranigvhas left
brunrobehas joined
MattJ
So maybe just Experimental <---> Proposed, with Deferred to the side
brunrobehas left
KitKat::new()has left
Maranda[x]has left
MattJ
Also there are some inconsistencies if you compare it to XEP-0001's diagram: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std
Zash
Does Deferred serve a purpose?
MattJ
For example, XEP-0001 shows that it can go directly from Experimental to Retracted, but yours does not allow that
MattJ
XEP-0001 suggests it's also impossible to retract a deferred XEP :)
> Does Deferred serve a purpose?
Very good question :)
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
yeah deferred seemed always a bit useless to me
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
basically the unpopular xeps are there
no_1729has joined
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
and they may be implemented and resurected
emus
wurstsalat: thanks wurstsalat!!!!
KitKat::new()has joined
brunrobehas joined
Zash
It's Experimental + time without changes. You can find that by sorting the list by date.
Wojtekhas joined
KitKat::new()has left
brunrobehas left
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
yeah
MattJ
I feel like it's good to have a "we're not actively working on this" status, but I think the "hasn't been updated for N months" has not turned out to be a good heuristic for that
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
yeah
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
I liked the idea I saw in the mailing list the other day
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
of having experimental xeps being added by default without votes
pep.
MattJ, agreed. If we kept using the same heuristic, I'd increase it to something like 3-4 years..
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
and just vote on the stable ones
MSavoritias (fae,ve)
something like experimental -> stable -> obsolete/retracted
Does a Deferred XEP need to go through Experimental before going to Proposed again?
Daniel
Council issues a last call for a deferred xep today ✎
Daniel
Council issued a last call for a deferred xep today ✏
pep.
wurstsalat, so you need a link from Deferred to Proposed as well :P
Daniel
So no?!
djorzhas joined
pep.
I think I'd put it outside of the lifecycle box.. with dashed lines.
stpeterhas joined
Zash
We can do whatever we want, these are not laws of physics :)
Daniel
One could argue that the state transition through experimental is implicit
wurstsalat
it doesn't have to be formally correct, but it should be guiding people who don't know anything about the process. I plan to show it here: https://xmpp.org/about/standards-process/
stphas joined
Zash
Deferred kinda sounds like it was an explicit decision to Defer the XEP, maybe it should be? Eligible if there doesn't seem to be any movement, either in discussion or implementation.
pep.
emus, wurstsalat, re providers', would you join xmpp:servers@joinjabber.org?join maybe to chat there?
Zash
For ... 25% of the age of Jabber. (Thus in like 2004, it would have been ~1 year, now more like 5)
MSavoritias (fae,ve)has left
Ingolfhas joined
paulhas left
antranigvhas joined
projjalmhas joined
paulhas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobihas left
Tobihas joined
Tobiashas joined
atomicwatchhas joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
snowhas left
edhelashas left
edhelashas joined
no_1729has joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
emus
pep.: Its not that I am unwilling to discuss, and we always have been, but see this: I haven't even managed to publish the newsletter. On the project we are really busy with automation, and reviews are pending.
Maybe it would make sense to discuss after we have published, when I look at our current capacities
emus
I prefer to spent my time there
emus
but maybe one of the other want to
emus
Still you can make proposals to the gitlab repo if you want
emus, ok sure. we're just trying not to duplicate the whole thing again. But if cooperation isn't smooth it will certainly be easier for us to do our own thing. (Don't get me wrong I understand the lack of time/motivation)
pep.
wurstsalat, bidirectional arrows are not possible here?
twisted firestarterhas joined
emus
Okay, then maybe state the differences you see and we can respond accordingly or tell what changes are up to come anyway so you dont need to do it
moparisthebesthas left
wurstsalat
pep., it's mermaid syntax, they are possible. but I tried to be closer to https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std
Matt, the people on twitter must love you, the post with your presentation got 2nd best view stats from all posts 🙂
Just the impressions from the Summit got more 😛
praveenhas joined
Axel Reimerhas left
emus
I have no access to the xmpp twitter account through twitterdeck - something changed?
millesimushas left
snowhas joined
PeterWhas joined
pep.
Weren't third-party clients forbidden recently? I don't use Twitter though
Daniel
Musk fucking things up 🤷
pep.
You mean centralized platforms fucking things up
millesimushas joined
Daniel
It's technically not a third party client
pep.
Musk is just helping a bit here :)
emus
^^ so this really dont work anymore?
moparisthebest
They just disabled the API, or are going to shortly
Daniel
They probably forgot that tweetdeck is their own product lol