XSF Discussion - 2023-07-03

For https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html is there an opinion on what should happen if a client does 7.6 and 7.7 at the same time? That is, a nick change + another presence change in the same packet

Broadcast nick change with new presence stuffs?

UNLESS they're doing `/nick Zash[away]`, in which case the whole thing should be rejected with `policy-violation, "Even IRC has better presence than that, silly!"`

singpolyma, presumably you would treat it the same as if someone sent a join + extra presence stuffs

wrt presence broadcast, not resending the whole state

right, that's what I would hope. At least ejabberd seems to ignore the extra presence stuffs and send instead the *old* presence stuffs

That's probably how it was meant to work. Seems unhelpful tho

or maybe that's leftover from when gtalk would do silly periodic rebroadcasts of *all* directed presence

as in, if they ever changed nick, they would flip back and forth periodically. very annoying.

Clearly this is why we defederated from GTalk and killed it.

I truly do not dare to predict what Openfire would do.

and I like the rationale that _we_ killed GTalk. :)

Obviosuly we did, when we started mandating TLS and they were left behind ;)

Google just couldn't keep up with us, we were moving too fast and encrypting things!

<insert meme here>

lets kill gmail for the same reason

> Google just couldn't keep up with us, we were moving too fast and encrypting things! "Move fast an break Google things" -- The XMPP Community ↺

finally back! it only took me 4 hours more than anticipated, but my infra is one important step closer to be properly unified again. :)