Logs for jdev
[05:14:19] * sudhakar joined the chat.
[05:14:34] <sudhakar> hi all
[05:18:58] * sudhakar left the chat.
[05:20:21] * johnny joined the chat.
[05:56:25] * mlundblad_laptop joined the chat.
[06:12:11] * evilotto left the chat.
[06:23:03] * sudhakar joined the chat.
[06:23:46] * sudhakar left the chat.
[06:49:35] * nabatt joined the chat.
[06:49:45] * nabatt left the chat.
[06:49:49] * nabatt joined the chat.
[06:54:05] * mlundblad_laptop left the chat.
[06:57:10] * Asterix joined the chat.
[07:01:07] * mlundblad_laptop joined the chat.
[07:02:53] * Guus joined the chat.
[07:03:39] * jprieur joined the chat.
[07:03:42] * jprieur left the chat.
[07:03:42] * jprieur joined the chat.
[07:03:43] * jprieur left the chat.
[07:12:13] * Tobias joined the chat.
[07:25:39] * Alex_G joined the chat.
[07:25:50] * Alex_G left the chat.
[07:35:35] * tkoski joined the chat.
[07:49:07] * Xificurk left the chat.
[07:49:09] * Xificurk joined the chat.
[07:50:11] * Ludovic joined the chat.
[07:53:43] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[08:01:55] * ermine joined the chat.
[08:07:34] * jonas joined the chat.
[08:12:35] * Zash joined the chat.
[09:02:19] * petermount joined the chat.
[09:40:14] * jugg left the chat.
[09:40:14] * jugg joined the chat.
[09:43:47] * nabatt left the chat.
[10:05:55] * bear joined the chat.
[10:09:06] * Zash left the chat.
[10:31:01] * MattJ joined the chat.
[10:46:07] * smoku joined the chat.
[11:17:02] * Ludovic left the chat.
[11:34:55] * Florob joined the chat.
[11:35:41] <mlundblad_laptop> hi, MattJ
[11:35:44] <MattJ> Hi
[11:35:59] <mlundblad_laptop> any news regarding jingle ft?
[11:36:44] <MattJ> Not yet, I'm just nearing completion on the sending half, so I can test interop with myself at least
[11:36:58] <MattJ> Gajim still refuses to work
[11:36:59] <mlundblad_laptop> cool
[11:37:15] <mlundblad_laptop> no so cool on the gajim issues :)
[11:37:38] <MattJ> Indeed :)
[11:43:39] * Treebilou left the chat.
[12:11:09] * Florob left the chat.
[12:11:12] * Florob joined the chat.
[12:22:00] * Zash joined the chat.
[12:37:15] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[12:37:24] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[12:37:27] * nabatt joined the chat.
[12:38:22] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[12:38:24] * nabatt left the chat.
[12:38:29] * nabatt joined the chat.
[12:38:46] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[12:42:45] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[12:43:13] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[12:44:19] * dbanes joined the chat.
[12:48:59] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[12:49:41] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[12:51:37] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[12:51:56] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[12:56:18] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[13:00:07] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[13:06:32] * dwd joined the chat.
[13:07:33] <dwd> /me reads last night's conversation.
[13:08:18] <dwd> The firewalls that read TLS encrypted stuff so so by themselves running a trusted CA, internal to the organization.
[13:08:53] <dwd> MattJ, And I can force a CA to give me a cert. I have a CA. It's just that I'm the only one that trusts it.
[13:09:12] <MattJ> Indeed, I don't think anyone would force you to give them a cert :)
[13:10:57] <dwd> ANyway.
[13:11:09] <dwd> Anyone a pubsub collections expert?
[13:12:21] <dwd> I mean, arguably I am, having got halfway through implementing XEP-0248, but that's a minor point.
[13:12:52] <louiz> well, you should ask, and we would see if we are able to answer your question
[13:13:07] <dwd> I was wondering about two things.
[13:13:32] <dwd> Firstly, I can't immediately find what permissions one should have in a collection to and and remove things. Ownership? Publication
[13:14:37] <dwd> Secondly, I was going to rant about being able to manipulate the contents of collections by changing child configs. Since
that's a heck of a lot of permission checks, *and* involves multiple changes which presumably are meant to be atomic.
[13:17:19] <johnny> dwd, talk to bjc
[13:17:27] <johnny> or maybe you have..
[13:17:36] <johnny> he said something about working on pubsub collections
[13:17:42] <johnny> just yesterday
[13:17:55] <johnny> i think he was editing the xep
[13:18:12] <dwd> Ah. That'd be interesting.
[13:21:42] <Zash> How does filesystems handle such stuff?
[13:29:41] <MattJ> I don't like disco
[13:29:49] <MattJ> !xep 30
[13:29:49] <Kanchil> MattJ: XEP-0030: Service Discovery is Standards Track (Final, 2008-06-06) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0030.html
[13:29:50] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[13:33:39] <dwd> MattJ, Prefer house?
[13:34:27] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[13:35:38] <MattJ> Hmm
[13:35:55] <MattJ> What if the server could include caps for its items in the disco reply?
[13:37:26] * Tobias left the chat.
[13:40:18] <Zash> MattJ: Recursive disco?
[13:40:41] <MattJ> Zash, that's what happens now
[13:40:49] <MattJ> Clients have to disco all their server's items to find out what they are
[13:40:58] <MattJ> and though the server itself can offer caps, the items can't
[13:42:06] <MattJ> Oh, though caps don't include items
[13:42:15] <MattJ> So if the items changed, you wouldn't know :/
[13:43:20] <Zash> Yay multidimentional trees!
[13:45:05] * Tobias joined the chat.
[13:52:05] * dbanes left the chat.
[13:52:21] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[13:54:27] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[13:58:10] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[13:58:32] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[14:12:08] <MattJ> Caps for items? :)
[14:12:42] <MattJ> I don't see why clients should be required to disco the server and a dozen other entities every time they log in
[14:13:47] <Zash> recursive iq disco request!
[14:14:46] <MattJ> You mean the server does the recursion?
[14:14:49] <Zash> Yes
[14:14:54] <MattJ> I don't like that much
[14:15:02] <MattJ> caps in items is more elegant
[14:15:55] <MattJ> See http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0065.html#disco
[14:18:55] <MattJ> or...
[14:18:59] <Zash> <iq><query disco#items><item><query disco#info/><///iq>
[14:19:16] <Zash> and put #info in each <item/> in the response
[14:19:28] <MattJ> No, it would be better if we specified a way for the client to get a list of items of a particular type
[14:19:43] <Zash> get items by caps?
[14:19:45] <MattJ> Still, for a feature clients can't depend on, that would just add complexity
[14:19:53] <MattJ> Caps change too easily
[14:20:42] <Zash> <iq get><search for='http://jabber.org/protocol/bytestreams'/></iq> or something?
[14:21:11] <MattJ> It would be <search category="proxy" type="bytestreams"/>
[14:21:18] * alkino joined the chat.
[14:21:23] <Zash> of course
[14:21:52] <MattJ> Actually...
[14:22:08] <MattJ> if those attributes were namespaced and put into a normal disco#items request...
[14:22:32] <MattJ> then a server can choose to ignore them, and worst case the client gets an unfiltered list it has to disco manually
[14:24:33] <Zash> <item jid name><query xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info'><idenity/><category/></item> :P
[14:25:15] <MattJ> True, perhaps that would be even simpler :)
[14:26:03] <Zash> that was what I mean by "and put #info in each <item/> in the response"
[14:26:41] <MattJ> Wait, no... this one is already solved with caps
[14:26:54] <MattJ> We include the caps in the <item>
[14:27:17] <MattJ> The issue now is that the client doesn't know what the list of items is, and /still/ has to make a disco#items request at
[14:27:21] <MattJ> because we have no caps for items
[14:29:32] * Tobias_ joined the chat.
[14:31:31] <Zash> Write a XEP!
[14:31:32] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[14:31:34] * Tobias_ left the chat.
[14:31:59] <MattJ> Later :)
[14:32:30] <MattJ> We just need some hash to be returned with disco#items and in stream features
[14:32:36] <MattJ> like roster versioning
[14:32:53] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[14:53:40] * mlundblad_laptop left the chat.
[14:54:48] * niekie left the chat.
[14:55:03] * bjc joined the chat.
[15:03:54] * niekie joined the chat.
[15:06:10] * Guus left the chat.
[15:08:10] <dwd> MattJ, Should be easy to do. Just order the items, stick a \0 between each one, and so on and so forth.
[15:08:22] <dwd> MattJ, The problem being how far down the tree to go.
[15:08:28] <MattJ> Indeed
[15:08:34] * Zash left the chat.
[15:08:40] * Zash joined the chat.
[15:09:25] <Kev> ALL THE WAY.
[15:09:28] <Kev> Wait, what?
[15:11:30] <Zash> Turtles!?
[15:14:00] <MattJ> Cheese on toast
[15:15:09] <dwd> Ah, the Welsh National Dish.
[15:15:47] <Kev> Cheese on toast with a floppy-eared accent.
[15:24:48] * Florob left the chat.
[15:48:09] * jonas left the chat.
[15:54:04] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[16:26:40] * jugg left the chat.
[16:37:43] * psa joined the chat.
[16:37:53] <psa> /me notes that he's not really here :)
[16:38:04] <MattJ> Noted also
[16:38:09] <psa> :P
[16:41:21] * hawke joined the chat.
[16:42:09] * nabatt left the chat.
[16:50:02] * evilotto joined the chat.
[16:55:09] <dwd> psa, I know you're not here. I even looked under the desk.
[16:56:05] <psa> heh
[16:56:16] <psa> I'm having a long IM meeting with my co-AD at the moment
[16:56:48] <dwd> Ask him if he's fixed his flag sync problem yet.
[17:03:56] * johnny left the chat.
[17:05:10] * johnny joined the chat.
[17:12:32] * Fritzy joined the chat.
[17:13:04] * petermount left the chat.
[17:18:48] * smoku left the chat.
[17:22:33] * niekie left the chat.
[17:22:35] * niekie joined the chat.
[18:02:08] * Florob joined the chat.
[18:06:11] <MattJ> I don't like XEP-0030 item nodes
[18:06:17] <MattJ> JFYI
[18:07:38] <psa> :)
[18:08:32] <MattJ> When I'm done with current work I'm thinking of investigating how to optimise the "walking of the tree" as the XEP calls it
[18:12:28] <MattJ> I wonder if XMPP lacks a "here but not here" status
[18:13:12] <Zash> For when?
[18:13:27] <MattJ> What status is a XEP-0198 user who gets disconnected? a BOSH user who pauses their session? A user in a MUC whose server goes
offline, but may yet return?
[18:14:08] <MattJ> They'll all want to return with the last status they had, but in the meantime it would be nice if there was a way to signal
they weren't there
[18:14:27] <Zash> unavailable + show online
[18:14:42] <MattJ> I don't think that would work somehow :)
[18:15:30] <MattJ> We need a <show>disconnected</show>, a bit like the Gajim bug that interpreted <show>connecting</show> and displayed a "Connecting..."
[18:15:47] <Zash> heh
[18:16:33] <Tobias> MattJ: what's the problem in showing them online?
[18:16:58] <MattJ> Tobias, because it's not really "online"? :)
[18:17:04] <Tobias> who'll notice?
[18:17:09] <MattJ> Me when I'm talking to waqas
[18:17:27] <Tobias> nah..it'll be as always he responding with a 30 minute lag
[18:18:10] <MattJ> But I won't be able to reliably time his responses without knowing whether he's there or not
[18:18:21] <MattJ> He could say "I was disconnected, that's why it took me so long to reply"
[18:18:28] <MattJ> and I wouldn't know!
[18:18:47] <Zash> Async communication!
[18:20:09] <Tobias> you know he's at his screen via chat state notification :)
[18:20:31] <MattJ> I hope you never tell him that
[18:20:32] <Tobias> he's not
[18:22:58] * Florob left the chat.
[18:27:53] * mlundblad joined the chat.
[18:39:40] <evilotto> MattJ: I'd call such a state "detached", like a screen session.
[18:41:00] <johnny> why not just use afk more..
[18:41:09] <Zash> xxa
[18:41:16] <johnny> either that, or have people default to Free For Chat
[18:41:20] <johnny> nobody seems to use that at all
[18:41:26] <Zash> Why don't we have a afk status?!
[18:41:33] <johnny> nobody on my buddy list i mean..
[18:44:14] <evilotto> pex 198
[18:44:18] <evilotto> xep 198
[18:44:25] <evilotto> !pex 198
[18:44:34] <evilotto> oh well...
[18:45:30] <johnny> !xep 198
[18:45:31] <Kanchil> johnny: XEP-0198: Stream Management is Standards Track (Draft, 2009-06-17) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0198.html
[18:46:42] * Neustradamus left the chat.
[18:52:43] * mlundblad left the chat.
[18:52:47] * mlundblad joined the chat.
[18:54:12] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[19:14:21] * Neustradamus joined the chat.
[19:27:35] * steve-e joined the chat.
[19:44:02] * Tobias left the chat.
[19:46:07] * Florob joined the chat.
[19:56:05] <Florob> If I just want to send/receive IQs I don't need to be interested, right?
[20:00:54] <MattJ> Right
[20:02:06] <Florob> just that interested is not the word I was looking for... What am I when I have send initial presence?
[20:02:48] * Tobias joined the chat.
[20:04:54] <Florob> available... right. braindamage
[20:06:01] <MattJ> You don't need to be available, you do need to have bound a resource though obviously
[20:07:42] <Florob> right. that's what I thought
[20:08:19] <Florob> Only slightly awkward after having reviewed 3921bis
[20:14:33] * Tobias left the chat.
[20:22:27] * Tobias joined the chat.
[20:22:28] <dwd> MattJ, Could sling in an additional <suspended xmlns='urn:xmpp:something' from='jabber.org' at='2010-08-19T20:21:00Z'/> into
the last known presence.
[20:22:59] <MattJ> dwd, yes, I think that may be most sensible
[20:23:36] <dwd> MattJ, Of course. My suggestions are always the most sensible.
[20:24:26] <dwd> MattJ, Got a second to think about PEP?
[20:24:35] <MattJ> I'll give you half a second
[20:25:08] <dwd> MattJ, If I say "foo+notify", but foo isn't a direct child of the root node, should I get foo's events or not?
[20:25:52] <dwd> MattJ, Also, if I say "bar+notify", and bar is a collection, do I get all of bar's children? (ie, do I get the equivalent
of a items subscription to bar)
[20:27:32] <MattJ> *gears whirring*
[20:28:12] <dwd> MattJ, FWIW, I think "yes" to both is rather a lot more interesting.
[20:28:42] <MattJ> I'm inclined to say yes to the first, maybe to the second
[20:29:10] <dwd> MattJ, But I appreciate that's partly because I don't think anyone else has a PEP service with XEP-0248. (Not that I really
[20:29:52] <MattJ> !xep 248
[20:29:52] <Kanchil> MattJ: XEP-0248: PubSub Collection Nodes is Standards Track (Deferred, 2008-08-11) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0248.html
[20:30:02] <MattJ> I thought it was security labels for a moment :)
[20:31:14] <dwd> MattJ, No, haven't (yet) added that bit in. Will do, though.
[20:31:57] <dwd> MattJ, Meaning I can restrict my PEP GeoLoc nodes to only those people in my Isode group with Confidential clearance. Woo.
[20:32:02] <MattJ> :)
[20:32:14] * Zash left the chat.
[20:32:19] * Zash joined the chat.
[20:32:21] <dwd> (A genuine example, shockingly)
[20:33:21] <Florob> dwd, wouldn't PEP use defaults which makes the answer to 2 "no"
[20:33:42] <Zash> I was going to say that inotify gives you changes to 1st level child nodes (files), but then my wifi died
[20:33:42] <dwd> Florob, No, PEP *has* sensible defaults. It's not mandated to *use* them.
[20:34:15] <dwd> Florob, So you can (if your PEP service supports it) reconfigure nodes, add collections, etc.
[20:34:41] <dwd> Florob, As of this afternoon, my dev build of M-Link can do all that. In a mildly broken way, of course. :-)
[20:35:54] <Florob> dwd, sure but ultimately it's subject to the value of pubsub#subscription_type right? And if you just do "bar+notify" and
nothing else I'd expect that to be "node"...
[20:36:36] <Florob> or maybe I just have it really backwards right now
[20:36:46] * steve-e left the chat.
[20:36:57] <dwd> Florob, There's (technically) a single auto-subscription in PEP to the root collection, of type items.
[20:37:24] <dwd> Florob, I doubt anyone implements it quite like that, mind, but it's meant to behave that way.
[20:45:56] * Asterix left the chat.
[20:55:10] * tofu left the chat.
[20:59:54] * Florob left the chat.
[21:03:43] * Treebilou left the chat.
[21:12:40] * ermine left the chat.
[21:24:11] <psa> dwd: I finished my proposed revisions regarding authorization identities -- please see post to the email@example.com list and
provide further feedback there
[21:25:03] <psa> however, it seems that I probably won't be able to post a revised I-D today (people need time to review the text), so I suppose
I'll do that tomorrow or over the weekend
[21:28:54] <dwd> psa, Righty. About to be off for the weekend, though, so I won't get to that until Monday now. :-/
[21:29:02] <psa> erk ok
[21:29:09] <psa> I'm supposed to be off next week :)
[21:29:22] <psa> perhaps I'll post the I-D and you can comment during IETF LC :)
[21:29:25] <dwd> How does one get the config of the root collection?
[21:29:26] <psa> or I can wait until Monday
[21:30:09] <psa> I suppose I'll wait
[21:30:16] <psa> there's no tremendous hurry :)
[21:30:47] <dwd> Oh, I see, I've conflated the unconflatable.
[21:30:57] <dwd> Whoops.
[21:31:15] <psa> I think that's the first time I've seen "unconflatable"
[21:32:33] <dwd> psa, First time I've written it.
[21:32:37] <Neustradamus> psa : it is possible to look why the website is down ? http://www.jabberpowered.org/
[21:32:42] * bjc left the chat.
[21:32:51] <dwd> psa, FWIW I think some of those MUSTs would better read SHALL.
[21:32:56] <psa> Neustradamus: it certainly is possible -- I mentioned that here the other day, just haven't gotten to it yet
[21:33:01] <psa> heh
[21:33:15] <Neustradamus> ok
[21:33:16] <psa> is there any effective difference between MUST and SHALL?
[21:33:19] <dwd> psa, Like "the client's bare JID [...] SHALL be the authorization identity"
[21:33:27] <psa> I rather like the word SHALL myself
[21:33:27] <dwd> psa, No, equivalent terms in RFC 2119.
[21:33:43] <dwd> psa, Like SHOULD and RECOMMENDED.
[21:33:48] <psa> dwd: yep
[21:34:07] <dwd> I've always been tempted to throw in a MIGHT.
[21:34:12] <dwd> Just to see what people do.
[21:34:23] <psa> MIGHT does not make RIGHT!
[21:36:38] <dwd> Servers MIGHT provide authentication identifiers, which receiving entities MUST verify to see if they LOOK RIGHT.
[21:38:29] <psa> I spent an inordinate amount of time changing "may" (lowercase) to "can" or "might" to reduce the possibility of confusion
[21:38:51] <dwd> "In some circumstances, entities have been observed to".
[21:39:32] <psa> too prolix
[21:39:37] <psa> in any case, have a good weekend
[21:39:39] <dwd> I like prolix.
[21:39:51] <dwd> That'd make a good name for a server, too.
[21:40:02] <psa> if you have a chance to review the text in more detail on Monday (thanks for the quick skim), that'd be super
[21:43:03] <Zash> Why did I read [xep 178]? Now my brain hurts :(
[21:43:04] <Kanchil> Zash: XEP-0178: Best Practices for Use of SASL EXTERNAL with Certificates is Informational (Active, 2007-02-15) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0178.html
[21:43:10] <psa> heh
[21:43:14] <psa> that's a fun one
[21:43:19] <psa> but it needs to be revised a bit
[21:43:38] <psa> I had hoped to get to that today, but 4 hours of meetings put an end to that dream :)
[21:44:18] <Tobias> psa: are those meetings large, in the amount of people?
[21:45:40] <psa> Tobias: one meeting was a 1-to-1 chat with Alexey (my co-Area-Director), the other was a conference call with ~5 people from
a certain large software company, the other was an internal presentation as Cisco with ~75 people -- just in case you really
wanted to know the details
[21:46:27] <mlundblad> yeah, meetings have a tendency to kill off energy :)
[21:47:12] <Tobias> psa: 75 people meeting..70 of them were sleeping i bet :P
[21:47:46] <psa> Tobias: perhaps -- I wasn't at the physical location, just heard it over webex
[21:48:02] <Tobias> psa: you could head them sleep?
[21:48:05] <Tobias> *hear
[21:48:09] <mlundblad> as long as they wheren't snoring...
[21:48:29] * tofu joined the chat.
[21:49:00] <psa> I think they were all muted :)
[21:49:09] <psa> /me waves to tofu
[21:49:39] <mlundblad> rumours have it Ronald Reagan could sleep and still looking like he was paying attention :)
[21:50:19] <Zash> impressive skill :)
[21:57:29] <alkino> psa: I one of the both gsoc student about jft
[21:57:33] <alkino> I'm*
[21:57:50] <alkino> if you want a feedback about XEP, i can do a brief
[21:58:48] <psa> alkino: that would be great
[21:59:04] * niekie left the chat.
[21:59:06] <psa> alkino: I started to fix up some stuff in XEP-0234 but I haven't finished yet
[21:59:12] <alkino> ok
[21:59:31] <alkino> about 166, it's correct
[21:59:41] <alkino> but not really clear about different action
[21:59:46] <alkino> the main actions are clear
[22:00:06] <psa> I've added a section to 234 describing which actions are and are not used in jingle file transfer
[22:00:19] <alkino> but other just like content-accept, content-reject...
[22:00:33] <alkino> i'm speaking only about 166
[22:00:44] <psa> sure
[22:01:14] <psa> to some extent, we are defining Jingle as build solutions to more problems
[22:01:28] <psa> the audio/video use cases require lots of jingle actions
[22:01:34] <psa> file transfer is less complex
[22:01:49] <alkino> I think we can use all the actions in 234 :$
[22:01:59] <psa> maybe
[22:02:24] <alkino> in 234: the hash
[22:02:42] <alkino> we can have more than one content in a session
[22:02:53] <alkino> and the hash refer only to the session ;)
[22:02:58] <alkino> not which content are concerned
[22:03:00] <psa> alkino: to send multiple files?
[22:03:05] <alkino> for example
[22:03:16] <alkino> IBB allow to send a file in each side
[22:03:22] <alkino> in the same IBB's session
[22:03:30] <psa> true
[22:03:34] <alkino> they're is a lot of possibility
[22:04:02] <alkino> we can send a movie in a content, and in an other a short view of this movie
[22:05:06] <psa> heh
[22:05:13] * mlundblad left the chat.
[22:05:14] <psa> I had not considered that
[22:06:50] <alkino> an other things
[22:06:56] <alkino> we can not do "pause"
[22:07:12] <alkino> say to the other side, we want a break in the transfer
[22:08:25] * dwd left the chat.
[22:08:26] <alkino> I think it could be interesting
[22:08:35] <psa> hmm
[22:08:36] <psa> yes
[22:08:38] <psa> brb
[22:09:25] <alkino> third: requesting files are not really documented
[22:09:58] <alkino> we can but I think it's unclear
[22:10:16] <alkino> for example, how know which files can we request
[22:10:28] <alkino> it's not really important but..
[22:11:07] <alkino> 261: IBB
[22:12:01] <alkino> 47 (first IBB) think of sending data in <message>, 261 not at all
[22:12:25] <alkino> 47 say it's not clean to use <message> but doesn't disallow it
[22:12:47] <alkino> so I think 261 should speak about it
[22:12:56] <alkino> in 261 I understand; only iq
[22:13:03] <alkino> but 261 say to refer on 47
[22:13:54] <alkino> it's all for my part
[22:14:02] <alkino> I haven't time for socks5 :$
[22:14:06] <psa> :)
[22:14:06] <psa> ok
[22:14:25] <psa> thanks
[22:14:35] <MattJ> I can add socks5 feedback soon ;)
[22:15:08] <psa> I'll think about this more and post more to the firstname.lastname@example.org list sometime (but probably not until after August 30 because
I'm supposed to be taking time off between now and then :)
[22:15:18] <MattJ> Time off??!
[22:15:31] <psa> yeah, crazy, I know
[22:17:29] <alkino> 10 days ??
[22:17:29] <alkino> so much ?
[22:17:42] <psa> well, that includes two weekends
[22:17:50] <psa> tomorrow, plus all of next week
[22:18:12] <psa> maybe it's only 9 days, sorry
[22:18:36] * tofu left the chat.
[22:22:47] <alkino> should I write it on the mailing list ?
[22:22:56] <alkino> (it's not a problem)
[22:23:03] <Tobias> alkino: that'd be best i think
[22:23:21] <Tobias> more people have access to it and it's more clearly archived
[22:23:30] <alkino> ok
[22:23:32] <alkino> I will
[22:23:34] <psa> yes, what Tobias said
[22:23:35] <alkino> tomorrow :$
[22:23:36] <psa> alkino: thanks
[22:28:57] * Fritzy left the chat.
[22:36:03] <psa> ok folks I'm going to log off now and I probably won't be on IM much until August 30
[22:36:23] <MattJ> Stay away, enjoy :)
[22:36:26] <psa> although there is an XSF Board Meeting that I need to attend on Tuesday
[22:36:29] <MattJ> !
[22:37:09] <psa> I didn't pay enough attention to the board list, so I missed my opportunity to object :)
[22:37:21] <MattJ> Heh
[22:37:55] <psa> cheers!
[22:37:58] * psa left the chat.
[22:44:22] * johnny left the chat.
[22:47:05] * johnny joined the chat.
[22:47:05] <alkino> it's crazy :$
[22:47:24] <Tobias> what?
[22:47:43] <alkino> I gave my opinions to cisco ingenieurs on his work xD
[22:49:38] <alkino> are some people paid in xsf ?
[22:50:36] <MattJ> The XSF doesn't pay anyone
[22:50:56] <MattJ> But most people in the XSF are paid by someone :)
[22:51:07] <alkino> yeah
[22:51:13] <Tobias> MattJ: in some sense
[22:51:29] <alkino> psa is it his job ?
[22:51:44] <alkino> or does he do something else in cisco ?
[22:52:47] <MattJ> It's his job
[22:52:54] <alkino> ok
[22:53:03] <alkino> and you who are you (both) ?
[22:53:10] <MattJ> I'm MattJ ;)
[22:53:12] <alkino> what are you in xsf ? :$
[22:53:24] * Lance Stout joined the chat.
[22:53:24] * Lance Stout left the chat.
[22:54:22] <MattJ> XSF member since 2007 or 2008, voted onto the XSF council for the current term
[22:55:22] <MattJ> I started as a GSoC student ;)
[22:55:28] <alkino> really
[22:55:34] <alkino> what have you done ?
[22:55:48] <MattJ> In 2007 I added BOSH support to gloox
[22:55:55] <MattJ> (C++ library)
[22:56:07] <Tobias> alkino: that's what he's most pround of
[22:56:10] <Tobias> *proud
[22:56:18] <alkino> xD
[22:56:28] <Zash> MattJ: Did you embedd Lua in it?
[22:56:32] <alkino> I don't know gloox :$
[22:56:47] <MattJ> Zash, I was only just getting to grips with Lua :)
[22:56:47] <alkino> ok a library :p
[22:57:05] <MattJ> Zash, but that's how HAL came about... gloox+Lua
[22:57:14] <MattJ> which is why he still crashes to this day :)
[22:57:23] <Zash> Haha :)
[22:57:26] * Lance Stout joined the chat.
[22:57:34] <Tobias> MattJ: yeah..you should have never added the lua part to it ;)
[22:57:35] * Lance Stout left the chat.
[22:57:37] <MattJ> I just really don't fancy debugging C++ again
[22:58:25] <MattJ> Tobias, that was responsible for a large number of crashes in the early days... Lua is very unforgiving if you misuse its
C API :)
[22:58:38] <Tobias> MattJ: so i've noticed
[22:58:52] <Tobias> however it's a long time since i last used its C API
[23:00:23] <alkino> and you Tobias ? :
[23:00:28] <alkino> what are you in xsf ?
[23:00:38] * Lance Stout joined the chat.
[23:01:20] <Tobias> alkino: i'm just a member for quite some years, and develop some tools that help XSF publish the documents and calendars for
meetings and such
[23:01:48] <alkino> ok
[23:01:55] <Tobias> alkino: and i've also been a GSoC student :)
[23:02:02] <alkino> yeah I see
[23:02:15] <alkino> RTP in gajim ?
[23:02:17] <alkino> no ?
[23:02:26] <Tobias> no
[23:02:27] <MattJ> Tobias has been a GSoC student 3 times!
[23:03:03] <alkino> so it's someone else :p
[23:03:14] <alkino> so what were your works ?
[23:04:16] <Tobias> some data form designer tool stuff (wasn't the best idea, if i think about it now), updating caps and adding BOSH and stuff
to libpurple, and adding some stream management stuff, SCRAM and some UI improvements to Psi
[23:04:53] <alkino> ok
[23:05:27] <alkino> the question is who haven't been gsoc student ?
[23:05:44] <Tobias> i think most of the people here haven't been
[23:05:55] <alkino> xD
[23:06:21] <MattJ> Kev has been, I don't think anyone else
[23:06:46] <alkino> kev too ?!
[23:06:51] <Tobias> alkino: yup
[23:07:01] <alkino> and what did he do ? :$
[23:07:07] <Tobias> plugin stuff for psi
[23:07:11] <Tobias> IIRC
[23:07:21] <alkino> ok
[23:24:47] <Zash> Does anyone know if the FB Chat support in WLM is using their XMPP interface?
[23:26:01] <MattJ> Please let me know when you find out - that could get interesting :)
[23:31:24] * hawke left the chat.
[23:34:13] <Zash> http://twitter.com/rbirkby/statuses/21479358941 is pretty much the only mention I've seen
[23:37:00] <alkino> lol
[23:37:00] <alkino> WLM support fb im :s
[23:37:00] <alkino> it's weird
[23:38:31] <Zash> All XMPP clients does too!
[23:41:08] <alkino> it's natural
[23:41:19] <alkino> but wlm going out their protocol
[23:41:27] <alkino> it's more surprising
[23:41:57] <Zash> Does AIM still have a XMPP interface?
[23:50:13] <johnny> no
[23:50:19] <johnny> i wish tehy did.. otherwise spectrum would be gone
[23:59:58] * Tobias left the chat.
[00:11:34] * niekie joined the chat.
[00:37:26] * Zash left the chat.
[01:16:17] * alkino left the chat.
[01:43:10] * jugg joined the chat.
[03:02:55] * scippio left the chat.
[03:03:08] * scippio joined the chat.
[03:10:17] * Lance Stout left the chat.
[03:18:54] * MattJ left the chat.
[04:12:33] * evilotto left the chat.
[04:12:52] * evilotto joined the chat.