XSF Discussion - 2023-06-26

  1. singpolyma

    edhelas: if the trouble is performance then a part-wasm acceleration probably does make sense

  2. Zash

    Hm, other than https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#subscriber-subscribe-last there's no mention of communicating timestamps of items (ignoring of course any in-payload timestamps). Would it make sense to stick a <delay> in the <item> next to the payload?

  3. MattJ

    I highly expect that to break stuff (sadly)

  4. emus

    Really neat what our cal0pteryx just did today! Sample: https://xmpp.org/software/gajim/

  5. emus

    https://jabbers.one:5281/file_share/oQzk7EFhG0nvaF27HL70LegZ/20230626_203440479_89d3..jpg

  6. emus

    This is possible if the doap file contains the right content ✎

  7. emus

    This is possible if the doap file contains the respective content ✏

  8. lovetox

    nice !

  9. moparisthebest

    Looks more amazing every time I look at it

  10. emus

    > moparisthebest: > 2023-06-26 08:42 (GMT+02:00) > Looks more amazing every time I look at it Yes!!

  11. Seve

    I'm lovin' it!

  12. emus

    🥰

  13. cal0pteryx

    Thanks :)

  14. pep.

    I wonder if it'd make sense not to filter on platforms if there is no platform specified :/

  15. pep.

    I just realized xmpp-parsers wasn't listed because of this. I guess I can start listed all platforms supported by rustc.. ✎

  16. pep.

    I just realized xmpp-parsers wasn't listed because of this. I guess I can start listing all platforms supported by rustc.. ✏

  17. pep.

    Also.. should we specify platform triples rather? :x ✎

  18. pep.

    Also.. should we specify target triples rather? :x ✏