XSF Discussion - 2024-03-24

Is cross platform a/v call possible yet?

Trung: yes

C' to C' (and various the forks) ? ✏

I need to buy another domain 🤣

Monal, Conversations, Dino, movim usually work together

All different platforms

Oh really ? When did we get there ? Oh cool !

3 years ago?

Oh right awesome ! Thank you

Monal seems to work very well recently (much better than a year ago) ✏

Oh i meant cross platform as in example1.com and exmaple2.com btw. Not hardward brand kind of platform

Doesn't matter, works all around. But this isn't really new.

It worked between different domains right from the start

Yeah i never tested it 🤣

(Iphone didnt so i just didnt bothered)

Hi, just wondering Monal and Dino had a/v three years ago already?

arne-bruen: Monal introduced Audio calls with version 6.0 on 18th of October 2023. Video calls were introduced on February 6t, 2024 (Monal 6.1.0).

Dino yes, monal no, but siskin

Thanks. Good they all support it now.

arne-bruen: I think Siskin startet with A/V calls in 2020 (September or something)

are they some people using xmpp on non-android(likes) nor iphones mobile devices here?

s1: plenty of usage on embedded systems. Not related to IM functionality though.

s1: also IM usage using desktop clients.

I saw Dino running on Linux smartphones

I've go-sendxmpp on basically all devices

Daniel, postmarket?

Guus, i mean, for IM especially ;)

> are they some people using xmpp on non-android(likes) nor iphones mobile devices here? I guess most people here also use desktop clients. I use profanity on my machines, but sometimes I also have a look at Gajim or Dino.

Ah, mobiles. Sorry.

s1: Sometimes Dino and profanity on Mobian (Debian GNU/Linux on mobile).

Any chat platform will be influenced or even controlled by politics and law if it has too many users. If the goverments do not care, the large amount of users will have political movement themselves too. So it is impossible that governments do not care about XMPP's development in the future (if you believe that XMPP IM like this will be used by most of people). Whatever that is a troll hole or not, it is bad that suggested room allows political discussion. And it is badly moderated, even once full of Chinese messages (most of Chinese XMPP users come to XMPP for political chat). In fact, suggesting such kind of room expresses chaotic political standpoints, even if it says “we are not responsible for the content or moderation of these channels.”. And it would be worse if it has many messages for political advertising. I do not believe XFS can stop the people who promote XMPP for others. Also I do not believe XSF can confront political stress of any government, since they are not politicians.

singpolyma, FTR, the /operators/ page is linked from the operators@ room topic and I agree with everything you said.

I do not want foreign XMPP chat environment get in touch with real politics so early. ✏

https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/1359 cc @ singpolyma

jonas’: great

Thank you.

> Any chat platform will be influenced or even controlled by politics and law if it has too many users ☭Mike Yellow: luckily XMPP is not a chat platform :)

That is why I added an “IM” after “XMPP” in my expression. :)

I'm saying that neither governments nor the XSF have any control over how anyone uses XMPP or what they use it for, it's a protocol, not a platform

Well, on the same level as anyone has any control over any language, or something.

The standands may be changed by enforcing from governments. Political power can do anything, I believe.

> The standands may be changed by enforcing from governments. > Political power can do anything, I believe. Impossible, and in some crazy future where the standards did change, no users would be forced to adopt the changes ↺

Well... OK.

>> The standands may be changed by enforcing from governments. >> Political power can do anything, I believe. > Impossible, and in some crazy future where the standards did change, no users would be forced to adopt the changes Being added to rtbl would cut down your participants significantly ↺

What? 1. There's no single "rtbl" 2. Rooms that use one use it by their own choice 3. Adding a server to an rtbl doesn't stop anyone else from joining it's rooms

Without getting into the weeds, the powers that be will find ways to reduce your participation if you don't follow whatever rules they set. They will make it harder to find banned servers.

What "powers" ?

THEY

Similar to mastodon

XMPP is YOU, no THEY ;)

> Xmpp is protocol

> The standands may be changed by enforcing from governments. > Political power can do anything, I believe. ☭Mike Yellow: the real problem would be forcing xmpp developers to do something, because xmpp is not popular enough now to not die out ↺

25 years of "not dying out" and instead "being used daily by billions of people across billions of devices" disagrees taba

Nobody can force XMPP developers or server operators as a whole to do anything, I believe anyone even remotely associated with standards development in the last fifteen years can attest to that

What can be done is to very slowly try to steer this very large and inflexible boat using both logical arguments, specs, implementations, and some sort of social pressure

> Nobody can force XMPP developers or server operators as a whole to do anything, I believe anyone even remotely associated with standards development in the last fifteen years can attest to that I see. They are above the law. ↺

And then some developer comes along and ships a non-standard feature that becomes a de-facto standard before the XSF has time to say 'ProtoXEP'

> 25 years of "not dying out" and instead "being used daily by billions of people across billions of devices" disagrees taba moparisthebest: nice cope ↺

there are like 2 people here

They are distributed to many different legal contexts, more like

corpos using xmpp doesn't count

> corpos using xmpp doesn't count Why not? ↺

Using the protocol is using the protocol no matter who you are

> there are like 2 people here And yet billions of XMPP daily users... Maybe I'm right then that the XSF has no power over these users ;) ↺

_here_ meaning this conference? Absolutely nobody uses public conferences but that doesn't say anything about XMPP in general

Daniel: WhatsApp has no public conferences therefore WhatsApp has no users

mathieui: also zoom then, neat

moparisthebest: funny how we quoted two products that tangentially used or still use xmpp though

Zoom literally uses XMPP

Far from tangentially

But no public conferences without an invite so no users by this definition :)

>> corpos using xmpp doesn't count > Why not? singpolyma: because they aren't paying the devs, are they ↺

I'm sure they pay their devs

They definitely pay devs

Who are these mythical "XMPP developers" that are being spoken of? I've never even heard of any

> 25 years of "not dying out" and instead "being used daily by billions of people across billions of devices" You mean the proprietary version known as WhatsApp etc? Wacky how even they basically gave up on multidevice support

moparisthebest: i think that's ironic from you, but I agree ✏

> Who are these mythical "XMPP developers" that are being spoken of? I've never even heard of any moparisthebest: the devs of the clients? the people who write xeps? ↺

taba: those would be devs of specific independent software projects

They sometimes write down what they are doing to make it easier to interop with other software, and that's called a XEP

>> 25 years of "not dying out" and instead "being used daily by billions of people across billions of devices" > You mean the proprietary version known as WhatsApp etc? Wacky how even they basically gave up on multidevice support kurisu: are you still roping about omemo keys? if whatsapp wasn't trash, i'm sure they'd manage to sync your keys. get off your high horse for 2 nanoseconds. xmpp works ↺

"are you still roping about this instance it doesn't work and that other instance it didn't work? Get off your high horse. It works"

taba: did you ever get those messages from this group that were lost for you

> They sometimes write down what they are doing to make it easier to interop with other software, and that's called a XEP moparisthebest: fine whatever. it's interesting that whatsapp specifically provides a subset of what xmpp provides right now ↺

Has WA published a single xep

> taba: did you ever get those messages from this group that were lost for you kurisu: completely irrelevant to the argument at hand ↺

dino managed to sync it

>> taba: did you ever get those messages from this group that were lost for you > kurisu: completely irrelevant to the argument at hand Xmpp not working is irrelevant to your claim that xmpp works? Ok ↺

I'll just leave this here: https://web.archive.org/web/20180726081758/https://lists.jabber.ru/pipermail/ejabberd/2009-June/005027.html

>> kurisu: completely irrelevant to the argument at hand > Xmpp not working is irrelevant to your claim that xmpp works? Ok kurisu: that was just me being a bitch. you disregarded the actual point just to feel correct ↺

The actual point being

i won't reiterate

your fixation was only like 10% of the message

What could I actually test dtmf against

kurisu: if you call conversations and send dtmf you should hear it on the other side. Otherwise iirc I sent you some referral codes for free JMP to test also

Ok I noticed that if I call dino from cheo and press buttons I don't hear anything

So I guess it needs special handling on the recepient?

Do I understand correctly it's sent via some rtp packet or whatever, not an audio tone?

> What could I actually test dtmf against kurisu: make our советских социалистических республики proud ↺

What

Yes the target has to bother to play it, maybe the dino strck does not

libwebrtc stuff will

https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0181.html Is this used or are rtp packets the norm instead

Also what if you instead produce dtmf sounds in the audio stream being sent. Is software expected to understand that as well? If so, what even is the point of doing it at the rtp packet level?

For dtmf? Yeah ignorn that dtmf xep, it even says right in the xep to mostly not use it, heh

Doing it at the rtp packet level is an alternate codec basically, more precise and reliable than doing it in a compressed audio stream. Either should generally work at least when bridged to pstn

MattJ: quick reminder for the (small) modifications to message processing hints. Ideally I would like to include that in my Last Call round tomorrow afternoon

Sorry, I of course didn't make it so far. I will have some time tomorrow morning, so I'll put a post-it in the middle of the screen to make sure it's the first thing I do tomorrow