Logs for jdev
[05:21:30] * lastsky left the chat.
[05:21:49] * lastsky joined the chat.
[06:15:51] * johnny left the chat.
[06:16:56] * johnny joined the chat.
[06:22:00] * johnny left the chat.
[06:22:42] * smoku joined the chat.
[06:23:06] * johnny joined the chat.
[06:24:49] * jkhii left the chat.
[06:28:44] * teo left the chat.
[06:28:44] * teo joined the chat.
[06:31:24] * awclinford joined the chat.
[06:31:24] * awclinford left the chat.
[06:31:52] * awclinford joined the chat.
[06:31:52] * awclinford left the chat.
[06:32:56] * awclinford joined the chat.
[06:53:23] * Guus joined the chat.
[07:16:03] * john joined the chat.
[07:34:02] * Guus left the chat.
[07:34:04] * Guus joined the chat.
[07:34:59] * ermine joined the chat.
[07:53:55] * Tobias joined the chat.
[07:59:07] * johnny_ joined the chat.
[08:02:45] * Tobias left the chat.
[08:05:00] * johnny_ left the chat.
[08:06:30] * johnny_ joined the chat.
[08:06:48] * johnny_ left the chat.
[08:07:06] * johnny_ joined the chat.
[08:07:48] * petermount joined the chat.
[08:07:58] * johnny_ left the chat.
[08:08:08] * johnny_ joined the chat.
[08:09:45] * johnny_ left the chat.
[08:33:30] * jprieur joined the chat.
[08:33:30] * jprieur left the chat.
[08:35:08] * tkoski joined the chat.
[08:40:27] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[08:46:32] * nabatt joined the chat.
[08:55:16] * dwd joined the chat.
[08:59:10] * misha joined the chat.
[08:59:11] * misha left the chat.
[09:01:35] * misha joined the chat.
[09:01:44] * misha left the chat.
[09:03:32] * waqas joined the chat.
[09:06:35] * misha joined the chat.
[09:06:44] * misha left the chat.
[09:11:35] * misha joined the chat.
[09:11:45] * misha left the chat.
[09:19:34] * Treebilou left the chat.
[09:36:57] * Link Mauve joined the chat.
[09:40:26] * MattJ joined the chat.
[09:43:57] * waqas left the chat.
[09:44:01] * waqas joined the chat.
[10:18:45] * yagiza joined the chat.
[10:21:51] * steve.kille joined the chat.
[10:44:29] * Zash joined the chat.
[10:50:16] * steve.kille left the chat.
[11:22:16] * Tobias joined the chat.
[11:33:08] * awclinford left the chat.
[11:34:53] <dwd> MattJ, Damn, have to make my directory harvester use <presence type='subscribe'/> now.
[11:35:18] <MattJ> Silently swallow that too?
[11:35:20] <petermount> hehe, just read the email
[11:35:46] <dwd> MattJ, Spec says to immediately reply with an unsubscribed, no?
[11:35:52] <MattJ> I thought that was optional :/
[11:35:59] <dwd> MattJ, Ah, could be.
[11:36:04] <Kev> I think that's required.
[11:36:07] <Kev> I could be wrong.
[11:36:12] <MattJ> I'm likely wrong
[11:36:14] <petermount> that sounds right to me
[11:36:38] <dwd> MattJ, Either way, I agree - users who don't exist should behave like users who are unresponsively not interested in talking
back.
[11:37:18] <MattJ> No such user: "For a presence stanza of type "subscribe", the server MUST return a presence stanza of type "unsubscribed"."
[11:37:29] <MattJ> (3921bis)
[11:37:30] <dwd> MattJ, But I'd bet I could build a director harvester that worked whatever, eventually.
[11:37:37] <MattJ> Yes, I'm sure too
[11:37:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[11:37:59] <MattJ> Post back to the thread :)
[11:37:59] * awclinford left the chat.
[11:38:01] <dwd> MattJ, I suppose one option would be to respond with service-unavailable even if we do store a message to offline.
[11:38:10] <MattJ> That would be Wrong.
[11:38:23] <dwd> Would it?
[11:38:26] <Kev> Yes.
[11:38:49] <dwd> We haven't delivered the message, we have no way of knowing when the message may be delivered or if it ever will be.
[11:38:54] <Kev> Error: Success.
[11:39:20] <dwd> Still, though, that replaces a harvester attack with a presence leak.
[11:40:22] <petermount> I wonder if theres a case of server side only storing messages from people in someones roster, then if not then respond service-unavailable.
[11:40:38] <dwd> petermount, That's certainly been proposed before.
[11:40:40] <petermount> ok that would be server dependent, but then at least the sender would know it wasn't delivered
[11:41:12] <Kev> But that's not quite right either.
[11:41:22] <Kev> Well, it's very not right.
[11:41:41] <Kev> You shouldn't need to be in someone's roster to be able to talk to them.
[11:41:51] <Kev> Some deployments may choose to add that requirement, but it shouldn't be mandatory.
[11:42:44] <petermount> i wan't saying mandatory, but as a server option... I could see some deployments choosing that, or an individual choosing
that.
[11:42:53] <Kev> Yes, I think that's entirely valid.
[11:42:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[11:42:58] * Tobias left the chat.
[11:42:59] * awclinford left the chat.
[11:43:08] * steve.kille joined the chat.
[11:43:32] <petermount> although then there's a choice, so if you choose to accept all messages then you know you may have the harvester issue...
[11:43:53] <petermount> but then at least that issue is then known about rather than someone saying later on of a 'security' hole which really isn't
[11:44:03] <dwd> Is awclinford's 5-minutely join and leave evidence that the Google issue is more complex than I'd hoped?
[11:44:23] <Kev> I thought this one was fixed.
[11:44:27] <dwd> petermount, Making it a per-user option or a per-server one?
[11:44:33] <dwd> Kev, Likewise.
[11:44:36] <Kev> It's not just the most recent presence that's sent, it'll all presence, if this is to be believed.
[11:45:21] <petermount> i've not used my google/retep.org a/c in here for some time now so don't know if thats still a problem - don't see it at all
on the muc.xmpp.org server which I still use it on
[11:47:03] <MattJ> :)
[11:47:16] <MattJ> I'll pretend Prosody has some anti-Google-bug magic
[11:47:16] <petermount> dwd: I think either - give the user a choice and/or the server admin may also enforce it
[11:47:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[11:48:39] <dwd> MattJ, Could be an odd edge case. Although he's joined and stayed this time.
[11:49:27] <Kev> Ordering?
[11:49:51] <petermount> dwd: I remember it did go in phases, I could be in here for hours without a problem, then on another time the problem would
reappear
[11:49:58] <petermount> kev: could be
[11:50:00] <dwd> Dunno. They were consistently 1 second apart.
[11:51:43] <Kev> Maybe a login and logout. That's the only thing to fix it that I know of.
[11:52:00] <dwd> Kev, But then he joined again bang on the 5 minnute mark.
[11:52:14] <Kev> Point.
[12:07:46] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:16:50] * yagiza left the chat.
[12:16:50] * yagiza joined the chat.
[12:23:38] <waqas> Would the text being discussed in issue #24 cause an information leak?
[12:24:07] <waqas> "For initial stream headers in client-to-server communication, if the client knows the XMPP identity of the principal controlling
the client (typically an account name of the form <localpart@domain>), then it MAY include the 'from' attribute and set its
value to that identity."
[12:24:30] <MattJ> I thought that was noted somewhere already
[12:24:38] <MattJ> to include it only after TLS
[12:24:38] <Kev> I've got #24 still in my inbox because I'm trying to process why you want this.
[12:24:53] <MattJ> Kev, it can be used to offer different SASL mechanisms to different users
[12:25:01] <waqas> Yes, that ^
[12:25:13] <Kev> Ok, that's reasonable.
[12:25:32] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:25:52] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:26:41] <waqas> MattJ: Right, a security note is right below that paragraph.
[12:35:24] <petermount> perhaps we should do something like this for xmpp http://jz10.java.no/java-4-ever-trailer.html
[12:39:15] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:39:19] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:39:39] <dwd> petermount, Okay, that's very silly.
[12:39:43] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:39:59] <petermount> yes it was
[12:40:01] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:40:09] <Zash> Haha, norweigan
[12:40:27] <dwd> petermount, No, I think you'll find it still is.
[12:42:51] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:42:58] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:44:00] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:47:07] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:47:56] * Tobias left the chat.
[12:48:01] * Tobias joined the chat.
[12:48:01] * awclinford left the chat.
[12:50:56] <MattJ> Java folks getting desperate? :)
[12:51:07] * john left the chat.
[12:51:18] <Zash> MattJ: Your'e planning a Lua variant, aren't you?
[12:51:36] <petermount> no, just have a good sense of humour... especially liked the xml part :-)
[12:51:38] <MattJ> Sadly, no
[12:52:00] <waqas> Zash: Are you implying Lua folks are also getting desperate? :)
[12:52:13] <Kev> 'getting'
[12:52:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[12:52:59] <Zash> waqas: "Lua folks"? You mean MattJ?
[12:52:59] * awclinford left the chat.
[12:53:24] <MattJ> I'm not desperate :)
[12:57:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[13:03:35] <dwd> MattJ, In denial, then.
[13:05:27] * nabatt left the chat.
[13:05:47] <MattJ> dwd, my server hasn't segfaulted in 2 years (yes, we found a bug in the early days in a C lib we didn't write that could crash
the process), and I haven't needed to restart it due to brokenness for as long as I can remember
[13:05:54] <MattJ> What language everyone else uses, I couldn't care less
[13:06:43] <dwd> You could at least have said "crash", so I could use the parking gag.
[13:07:07] <petermount> mattj: precisely - as long as the end result works...
[13:07:53] * Florob joined the chat.
[13:10:57] <Zash> MattJ: Perhaps you feel a little lonley up there on the moon? ;)
[13:11:04] <MattJ> :)
[13:25:39] * tofu joined the chat.
[13:25:45] * tofu left the chat.
[13:36:12] * awclinford left the chat.
[13:37:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[13:40:45] * Tobias left the chat.
[13:44:14] * Florob left the chat.
[13:46:11] * Link Mauve left the chat.
[13:51:07] * maalox left the chat.
[13:53:18] * Kev left the chat.
[13:56:42] * Kev joined the chat.
[14:00:20] * nabatt joined the chat.
[14:03:13] * jugg left the chat.
[14:03:18] * jugg joined the chat.
[14:03:51] * teo left the chat.
[14:24:20] * nabatt left the chat.
[14:24:39] * nabatt joined the chat.
[14:27:14] * hawke joined the chat.
[14:33:12] * Tobias joined the chat.
[14:33:12] * awclinford left the chat.
[14:37:58] * awclinford joined the chat.
[14:46:08] * teo joined the chat.
[14:52:15] * awclinford24635 joined the chat.
[14:52:15] * awclinford24635 left the chat.
[14:52:15] * awclinford17546 joined the chat.
[14:52:15] * awclinford17546 in now known as awclinford62507.
[14:52:15] * awclinford62507 left the chat.
[14:52:15] * awclinford17546 joined the chat.
[14:52:16] * awclinford17546 left the chat.
[14:52:16] * awclinford left the chat.
[14:52:59] * awclinford joined the chat.
[14:52:59] * awclinford left the chat.
[14:55:35] * deryni joined the chat.
[14:56:43] * Guus left the chat.
[14:56:49] * awclinford joined the chat.
[14:56:49] * awclinford left the chat.
[14:58:52] * awclinford joined the chat.
[15:05:44] * lastsky left the chat.
[15:07:47] * tkoski left the chat.
[15:22:15] * awclinford left the chat.
[15:24:35] * awclinford joined the chat.
[15:24:35] * awclinford left the chat.
[15:25:08] * smoku left the chat.
[15:25:12] * maalox joined the chat.
[15:26:56] * Guus joined the chat.
[15:27:17] <maalox> Have a question. If this is not the right place to post this question please let me know what room I should use. Does anyone
know if Google requires s2s encryption for federation?
[15:27:46] <Zash> maalox: no, it's the reverse
[15:28:21] <Zash> I had my server require encryption on s2s, and it would refuse to talk to gtalk
[15:29:14] * awclinford joined the chat.
[15:31:12] * awclinford left the chat.
[15:32:48] * Florob joined the chat.
[15:46:47] * waqas left the chat.
[15:47:19] <maalox> OK that is a bit confusing to me. Here is why I ask. I have an older jabberd2 server and up until recently I have been able
to add gtalk users. In the past few day I have not been able to and I don't know why. Thought it might be that my unencrypted
s2s connection might be the issue. I thought that because I have an Openfire server that I have been testing and I have s2s
encryption set to required and I am able to add my gtalk account. Hence the confusion....
[15:47:57] <Zash> Odd
[15:48:23] <maalox> BTW my Openfire server has a valid, not self signed, cert.
[15:48:27] * Florob left the chat.
[15:48:34] * Florob joined the chat.
[15:49:17] <Kev> What happens to the jabberd2 server when it tries to connect? (I'm assuming there's a way to get a protocol trace out of it)
[15:51:53] <maalox> Here is what I am seeing in the XML console on Psi. Sorry in advance for the ugly post.
<iq type="set" id="ab46a" >
<query xmlns="jabber:iq:roster">
<item jid="gmailuser@gmail.com" />
</query>
</iq>
<presence type="subscribe" to="gmailuser@gmail.com" >
<nick xmlns="http://jabber.org/protocol/nick">user</nick>
</presence>
<iq type="set" to="jabberuser@myjabber.server/frigg" >
<query xmlns="jabber:iq:roster">
<item subscription="none" jid="gmailuser@gmail.com" />
</query>
</iq>
<iq type="result" />
<iq type="result" id="ab46a" />
<iq type="set" to="jabberuser@myjabber.server/frigg" >
<query xmlns="jabber:iq:roster">
<item subscription="none" ask="subscribe" jid="gmailuser@gmail.com" />
</query>
</iq>
<iq type="result" />
<iq type="error" >
<error type="cancel" code="501" >
<feature-not-implemented xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-stanzas"/>
</error>
</iq>
<iq type="error" >
<error type="cancel" code="501" >
<feature-not-implemented xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-stanzas"/>
</error>
</iq>
[15:53:17] <Kev> That doesn't help, it's what the server's saying to gmail (and vice versa) that's needed.
[15:53:31] <Kev> Also: Is your jabberd2 server really old? Some of that protocol's illegal.
[15:54:18] <maalox> It is jabberd2 ver. 2.0s8
[15:55:02] <Kev> Oh, no jabberd2 releases since 2006?
[15:55:07] <Kev> I hadn't appreciated it was that dead.
[15:55:48] <deryni> http://codex.xiaoka.com/wiki/jabberd2:releases ?
[15:55:57] <Kev> Ah.
[15:56:04] <Kev> So the list I was looking at was incomplete.
[15:56:11] <Kev> (http://www.silfreed.net/download/repo/packages/jabberd/)
[15:56:22] <MattJ> That's jabberd, no?
[15:56:33] <MattJ> Hmph
[15:56:39] <Kev> jabberd-2
[15:56:50] <Kev> Please don't tell me we've got jabberd1 v2 and jabberd2
[15:57:08] <Kev> anyway.
[15:57:19] <MattJ> Kev, thankfully it seems not
[15:57:23] <Zash> (fork jabberd and call it extended jabberd!)
[15:57:25] <MattJ> Though it's confusing some people enough apparently :)
[15:58:37] <Kev> maalox: so you're half a decade out of date, and should probably upgraed.
[15:59:44] <maalox> Yes, for sure. That is why I am bring up a new server. I am just trying to keep the jabberd2 server patched together till
I do. :(
[16:01:33] * jkhii joined the chat.
[16:02:00] <maalox> I will see what I can do to get the protocol trace on the s2s connection. Any suggestion as to how I might do that before
I start spinning my wheels?
[16:02:11] <Kev> I know very very little about jabberd2
[16:02:18] <maalox> k
[16:02:50] <maalox> How about Openfire?
[16:03:12] <Kev> A little more.
[16:03:15] <Kev> But not much.
[16:03:20] <maalox> k
[16:03:23] <Kev> I ran an openfire server for a while.
[16:03:33] <maalox> What do you run now?
[16:03:41] <deryni> jabberd2 might put that traffic into its log files at the right levels, short of that wireshark'll do for unencrypted connections.
[16:03:42] <Kev> M-Link (commercial)
[16:04:10] <maalox> OK so you are a jabber.org admin?
[16:04:16] <MattJ> Is anyone else finding dwd's posts to the XMPP list come in late?
[16:05:02] <Kev> MattJ: days.
[16:05:06] <MattJ> He just replied to 6 threads at the same instant
[16:05:40] <MattJ> and the timestamps on them are hours ago
[16:05:47] <maalox> Kev, is there a M-Link open source? Commercial may not be an option for us.
[16:05:57] <Kev> maalox: no.
[16:06:12] <Kev> maalox: I'd look at Prosody if you want a free variety, personally.
[16:06:22] <MattJ> /me blushes
[16:06:41] <petermount> mattj: I just got a batch as well, all from 5 hours ago but received 4mins ago
[16:06:53] <MattJ> petermount, good, so it's not just me
[16:06:56] * scippio left the chat.
[16:07:09] * scippio joined the chat.
[16:07:28] <maalox> OK I will look at it. thanks again.
[16:08:14] <MattJ> petermount, I'd put it down to him writing the emails in his client, saving them, and transmitting them later - but 1) I don't
believe his client allows that 2) he hasn't been at his computer for 30min or so
[16:08:48] * julm joined the chat.
[16:09:37] <petermount> smtp server between him and them queuing them up is another possibility, or ietf's mail server on sending them...
[16:10:46] * Guus left the chat.
[16:12:27] <MattJ> According to the headers it looks like they sat for 5 hours at amsl.com
[16:13:07] <MattJ> Where it was spam-assessed and virus-scanned
[16:13:51] <Kev> Lucky it.
[16:13:59] * Zash left the chat.
[16:17:34] * Tobias left the chat.
[16:23:44] * Tobias joined the chat.
[16:24:37] * nabatt left the chat.
[16:27:27] * Lirodon joined the chat.
[16:27:42] <Lirodon> Is there any specification for sending drawn messages?
[16:28:54] <Kev> Like whiteboarding?
[16:29:09] <Lirodon> more like how MSN does it
[16:29:16] <Kev> I have no idea what MSN does.
[16:29:32] <petermount> me neither... I was thinking of whiteboarding or wave...
[16:29:42] <Kev> If it's showing an image as it's drawn, whiteboarding seems to be the anwser, if it's sending a pre-drawn image, file transfer.
[16:30:40] <Lirodon> MSN: has some sort of "handwriting" pane where you can "send" drawn messages
[16:30:46] <Lirodon> in a normal chat.
[16:30:50] <johnny> that's whiteboarding sorta..
[16:30:50] <Kev> One-sided whiteboarding, then.
[16:30:58] <Lirodon> they come up in the chat window like a regular message
[16:31:15] <Kev> Does the other side see it before the drawing's complete?
[16:31:27] <Lirodon> no
[16:31:28] <johnny> there's no need for a spec if not.. just some OLE.. or whatever
[16:31:36] <johnny> not sure what MS does these days
[16:31:41] <johnny> just emed the app you want
[16:31:42] <Kev> So xhtml-im already has you covered.
[16:31:51] <Lirodon> this is one of the things they randomly removed from the new WLM beta
[16:31:54] <johnny> embed*
[16:32:05] <johnny> are you sure it was "random" ?
[16:32:10] <johnny> maybe not many people used it
[16:32:18] <johnny> it was probably on purpose
[16:32:37] <Lirodon> they're trying to repurpose WLM this release as a social media aggregrate
[16:32:42] <deryni> Handwritten (ink) messages are gone from the current betas?
[16:32:59] <Lirodon> yeah
[16:33:01] <johnny> /me has never used msn..
[16:33:02] <Lirodon> and even worse
[16:33:14] <Lirodon> they removed the ability to set a screen name in the client
[16:33:24] <johnny> that could just be abug?
[16:33:27] <Lirodon> it forces the real name you have inputted on your Windows Live profile.
[16:33:36] <johnny> i don't think people will stand for that
[16:33:40] <Lirodon> Its on purpose cause they're trying to oh, "reduce confusion" and such
[16:33:45] <Lirodon> and yes, people are complaining
[16:33:56] <MattJ> johnny, have you ever seen MSN users' screen names? :)
[16:33:59] <johnny> sure.. if it's beta..
[16:34:05] <johnny> they might just be trying somet things
[16:34:23] <johnny> MattJ, uhmm.. it can't be much worse than their emails hu?
[16:34:24] <johnny> huh*
[16:34:29] <deryni> They removed that from the official client? I thought they just made it per-session?
[16:34:57] <deryni> I mean I know they made the names per-session with a fallback to the Live profile information, I didn't realize the betas
don't set the per-session name anymore.
[16:35:13] * tofu joined the chat.
[16:35:15] <Lirodon> per-session?
[16:35:37] <deryni> Yes, when you log in you can set the name, if you don't you get the Live name.
[16:35:51] <deryni> When you sign out the Live name gets set again.
[16:35:58] <Lirodon> but now you HAVE to do it on the site. Strangely however...
[16:36:24] <Lirodon> My usual (and contrastly short) name still comes up, I still use the current version
[16:36:29] <Lirodon> My friend, sees it like this http://blackcat.dalnet.ca/screens/wlmessbeta_24-06-2010.png
[16:36:48] <johnny> anyways.. please do'nt troubleshoot msn messenger here :)
[16:37:30] <Lirodon> They also removed one-way video chat
[16:37:47] * steve.kille left the chat.
[16:37:58] <deryni> You don't have to set it on the site if you only care about what is set when you are logged in and you are using a client
that sets it at login time, but as johnny says this isn't really the place for this anymore. =)
[16:38:15] <deryni> Good lord I can't even begin to make sense of that window.
[16:38:51] <Lirodon> and this is why I'm trying to push XMPP a bit more on a art site I go on
[16:39:23] * tofu left the chat.
[16:39:27] <MattJ> Well there's no reason a client couldn't implement what you want - using XMPP's "XHTML-IM" extension
[16:39:41] <MattJ> so find a client project you like, and pester them :)
[16:39:54] <Kev> MattJ: isn't that what I said several minutes, a screenshot of MSN, and some mind-bleach ago?
[16:40:10] <deryni> Heh.
[16:40:11] <MattJ> Kev, maybe, I was at another PC :)
[16:40:21] <Lirodon> But here's the thing, how would it generate or send the resulting images?
[16:40:28] <deryni> We should write a version of SXE that just composes these images. =)
[16:40:53] <Kev> Well, generating the image isn't a protocol issue, it's 'just' embedding an editor widget.
[16:40:55] <deryni> Lirodon: How to generate them (that is let the person draw them) is a client thing and they would just be sent as inline images
however the clients already do taht.
[16:41:15] <Kev> Small images can be sent inline in the xhtml-im.
[16:41:18] <Lirodon> oh
[16:41:30] * Florob left the chat.
[16:41:34] <Kev> I don't remember if we have a way of referencing a file-transfer stream from xhtml-im, I think we may not.
[16:42:24] <MattJ> But if a client developer decides they need that to do this, they can still implement it, and seek for it to be standardized
[16:43:14] <Kev> It might be a nice feature.
[16:43:36] <Lirodon> Yeah
[16:43:36] <Kev> Although it's not clear to me that it's better than whiteboarding.
[16:44:09] <Lirodon> its more for sending little sketches/handwritten notes to eachother. Some of the artist friends I got on my contact list use
that
[16:44:52] <Lirodon> what gets annoying is when you can't do it in group conversations if anyone in there uses a version that doesn't support it
[16:45:25] <Lirodon> It's more of a novelty than anything, but if there can be BLOG sites where you can only do drawn entries, there's probably
a good market for this
[16:45:31] <MattJ> Well XMPP would cope fine with that - the users that didn't support it just wouldn't see it (they'd see a text alternative)
[16:46:02] <Lirodon> but if it's done in a way that's backwards compatible
[16:47:39] <Lirodon> allegedly, MSN's implement uses inline gif images
[16:48:07] <Kev> That's what I'd probably do.
[16:48:11] <Kev> Either that or svg.
[16:48:54] <Lirodon> PNG or SVG
[16:49:01] <Lirodon> PNG would probably be easier
[16:50:06] <Kev> SVG has several advantages, though.
[16:50:11] <Lirodon> then we could easily have more than 16 color options
[16:50:23] <Lirodon> either way
[16:51:39] <Lirodon> but for backwards compatibility
[16:55:41] <Lirodon> anyway, I posted it up on their getsatisfaction thingy
[16:56:26] <Lirodon> http://getsatisfaction.com/pandion/topics/handwriting_support
[17:03:22] <dwd> MattJ, The late posts are because Peter's been using my isode.com address rather than my usual dave@cridland.net
[17:04:09] <MattJ> and that causes your mail to get lagged? and isn't that the address you're subscribed to the list with?
[17:20:37] * julm left the chat.
[17:25:24] * johnny left the chat.
[17:25:56] * johnny joined the chat.
[17:28:05] * waqas joined the chat.
[17:28:30] * hawke left the chat.
[17:29:15] * julm joined the chat.
[17:30:38] * Lirodon left the chat.
[17:30:59] * julm left the chat.
[17:31:57] * qqq joined the chat.
[17:33:20] * qqq left the chat.
[17:34:32] * jugg left the chat.
[17:36:02] * johnny left the chat.
[17:38:22] * johnny joined the chat.
[18:07:19] * teo left the chat.
[18:07:19] * teo joined the chat.
[18:15:01] * darkrain42 left the chat.
[18:23:07] * yagiza left the chat.
[18:49:51] * Neustradamus left the chat.
[18:52:33] * Neustradamus joined the chat.
[19:08:20] * darkrain42 joined the chat.
[19:10:37] * darkrain42 left the chat.
[19:17:43] * nabatt joined the chat.
[19:38:15] * tofu joined the chat.
[19:41:41] * tofu left the chat.
[19:58:53] * dwd left the chat.
[20:07:54] * petermount left the chat.
[20:51:32] * maalox left the chat.
[21:05:41] * darkrain42 joined the chat.
[21:13:15] * Guus joined the chat.
[21:29:34] * tofu joined the chat.
[21:34:01] <Tobias> is there any alternative to smack when it comes to client xmpp libraries for java?
[21:35:21] <Kev> To the best of my knowledge, the answer is essentially 'no'.
[21:35:31] <waqas> Yes, but Smack is probably the most widely used and actively developed.
[21:36:02] * ermine left the chat.
[21:36:13] <MattJ> Tobias, http://code.google.com/p/asmack/
[21:36:36] <MattJ> A fork, that's actually, you know, developed :)
[21:36:46] <Tobias> waqas: Smack is actively developed? :P
[21:36:54] <Tobias> MattJ: ahh..nice :)
[21:37:22] <waqas> Tobias: It gets commits every once in a while
[21:37:28] <Tobias> was testing some Eclipse plugin and nearly puked on my keyboard as i noticed that it doesn't support SRV resolution :P
[21:38:37] <MattJ> Tobias, that one was mentioned in Brussels
[21:38:55] <Tobias> MattJ: you mean asmack?
[21:39:06] <Kev> Yes.
[21:39:33] <Tobias> ah...maybe i forgot then, or didn't notice in the first place
[21:39:54] <waqas> MattJ: aSmack isn't very actively developed either. Last commit was in January.
[21:40:11] <waqas> It does seem to have support for SRV records
[21:50:28] <johnny> hah
[21:50:31] <johnny> poor java people
[21:50:36] <johnny> i thought php was the suck one out
[21:50:44] <johnny> /me blames MattJ for this
[21:51:43] <waqas> It's not like any Lua client libraries have SRV support ;)
[21:51:55] <johnny> ?
[21:51:59] <johnny> verse?
[21:52:03] <waqas> Yeah :)
[21:52:20] <johnny> so you say it does not support SRV?
[21:52:28] <johnny> /me gueses that lua dns libraries are not so awesome?
[21:52:43] <deryni> It isn't like a whole bunch of home routers fail at SRV anyway.
[21:52:48] * teo left the chat.
[21:52:49] * teo joined the chat.
[21:53:01] <johnny> that reminds me
[21:53:11] <johnny> when is openwrt supposed to come out with 10.03.1 :(
[21:53:42] <waqas> johnny: The best Lua DNS library is the one in Prosody :)
[21:54:08] <johnny> 6 weeks later..
[21:54:14] * Florob joined the chat.
[21:54:21] <johnny> late*
[22:00:17] * deryni left the chat.
[22:08:05] * waqas left the chat.
[22:09:31] * waqas joined the chat.
[22:12:20] * jkhii left the chat.
[22:13:47] * smoku joined the chat.
[22:35:23] * smoku left the chat.
[22:36:14] * smoku joined the chat.
[22:38:04] * smoku left the chat.
[23:12:31] * darkrain42 left the chat.
[23:45:48] * waqas left the chat.
[23:45:53] * waqas joined the chat.
[23:53:22] * waqas left the chat.
[23:53:25] * waqas joined the chat.
[23:56:32] * Guus left the chat.
[00:18:06] * Florob left the chat.
[00:18:38] * waqas left the chat.
[00:21:14] * waqas joined the chat.
[00:32:02] * tofu left the chat.
[00:37:28] * johnny left the chat.
[00:38:45] * jkhii joined the chat.
[00:38:59] * darkrain42 joined the chat.
[00:41:47] <darkrain42> Can anyone else reproduce this (http://pastebin.com/PSMbfS6H)? (this was just telnetting to jabber.org 5269)
[00:43:12] <darkrain42> !xep dialback
[00:43:13] <Kanchil> darkrain42: Multiple matches: XEP-0220: Server Dialback, XEP-0185: Dialback Key Generation and Validation
[00:43:16] <darkrain42> !xep 220
[00:43:16] <Kanchil> darkrain42: XEP-0220: Server Dialback is Standards Track (Experimental, 2009-08-05) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0220.html
[00:52:18] * johnny joined the chat.
[00:59:15] * darkrain42 left the chat.
[01:01:00] * darkrain42 joined the chat.
[01:04:09] * Tobias left the chat.
[01:04:53] <waqas> darkrain42: Yes, I can.
[01:10:39] * tofu joined the chat.
[01:15:27] <darkrain42> :(
[01:15:28] * Zash joined the chat.
[01:15:49] <waqas> ? :(
[01:16:19] <darkrain42> I was hoping it was just me doing something wrong, that's all.
[01:16:39] <darkrain42> Kev: http://pastebin.com/PSMbfS6H
[01:20:37] * tofu left the chat.
[01:57:25] * Zash left the chat.
[02:48:54] * MattJ left the chat.
[03:28:14] * waqas left the chat.
[04:09:15] <johnny> hah. his part message :)
[04:09:20] <johnny> silly miranda
[04:12:06] <darkrain42> Heh
[04:30:40] * dbanes joined the chat.