Logs for jdev
[00:29:59] <Tama> buddycloud is interesting.
[00:30:10] * marseille joined the chat.
[00:30:26] <Zash> I wish it used moar PEP tho
[00:30:35] <louiz’> why?
[00:30:47] <Zash> Easy discovery.
[00:31:13] <louiz’> the only good point about PEP
[00:32:11] <Zash> That's pretty much what PEP is. The rest is mostly about what PubSub features you have to implement, and default configuration.
[00:32:49] <Zash> I think dwd wrote a post about the awesomeness you get if you actually have full blown PubSub there, instead of just the PEP
subset.
[00:33:04] <louiz’> Yeah, but you have no persistant items, for example…
[00:33:56] <louiz’> and how do you let others post on your PEP node?
[00:35:59] <Tama> pep is a good start, as a subset of pubsub. buddycloud says they built on top of pubsub.
[00:36:30] <louiz’> I think pep is too limited for what they want to do
[00:36:36] * BuddyCoyo joined the chat.
[00:37:05] <BuddyCoyo> okay, so i can use buddycloud as a normal xmpp server. i can connect to conferences, etc.
[00:38:57] <louiz’> They just have an additional component
[00:40:45] <Tama> yeah. that's what the buddycloud guys said.
[00:40:53] <Tama> buddycloud is a component
[00:41:05] <louiz’> yes
[00:41:21] * BuddyCoyo left the chat.
[00:43:24] <Zash> louiz’: if you only implement what pep says you need to, then yes, that's pretty limited
[00:45:18] <Tama> hey, is there an "emote" xep for the /ME command?
[00:45:58] <mathieui> emote?
[00:46:01] <Zash> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0245.html
[00:46:01] <Tama> /me uses emotes all of the time. most clients recognize the /me prefix as an emote, but it doesnt have to display it that
way.
[00:46:02] <louiz’> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0245.html
[00:46:07] <louiz’> emote?
[00:46:07] <Tama> thanks :D
[00:46:17] <Zash> Tama: http://xmpp.org/xmpp-protocols/xmpp-extensions/
[00:46:20] <louiz’> what is an “emote”?
[00:47:16] <Tama> what you linked. "/me emotes, or gestures"
[00:47:34] <Tama> not gestures, pose. it's called a pose, sometimes.
[00:49:17] <Tama> in really old mud/muck servers, it's called a pose. i wonder why everyone decided to simply send the /me literally, and just
look for that string? i realize it's kindof hackish in irc, in that the character [0x0001]ACTION is sent, but... -shrugs-
[00:49:32] <Tama> oh well.
[00:49:41] <Zash> It degrades gracefully :)
[00:49:57] <Tama> heh.
[00:49:59] <Zash> People who understand the concept understand just as well if it literally says /me does stuff
[00:50:03] * scippio joined the chat.
[00:50:07] <Tama> well, this is true.
[00:51:11] <Tama> it just looks ugly. there isnt really any other standard way to emote, i use -does stuff- but that's far from standard. most
people uses *does stuff* but that is usually bolded, and is supposed to be interpreted as emphasis, not an emote.
[00:51:30] <Tama> /me shrugs.
[00:51:35] <Tama> it seems to work well enough.
[00:52:24] <Tama> so zash, do you think buddycloud will be widely adopted by xmpp servers?
[00:52:32] <louiz’> what XMPP client doesn’t support that?
[00:52:51] <Zash> Tama: time will tell
[00:53:02] <Zash> /me shall sleep
[00:53:06] * Zash left the chat.
[00:56:19] <Tama> sleep well o/
[00:56:37] <Tama> louiz': how are ya feeling?
[00:57:13] <louiz’> great
[00:57:15] <louiz’> tired
[00:57:28] <Tama> awww
[00:57:49] <louiz’> it’s 2am here
[00:58:12] <Tama> ouch.
[01:15:01] * darkrain_ left the chat.
[01:22:09] <Tama> /me is reading about buddycloud
[01:22:12] <Tama> also http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_internet/?ctcDncb
[01:40:59] <Tama> /me read read reads https://buddycloud.org/wiki/Developer_overview#buddycloud_uses_XMPP.27s_federated_messaging_bus
[01:54:56] * Neustradamus left the chat.
[02:15:37] * keemo905 joined the chat.
[02:15:37] * keemo905 left the chat.
[02:16:16] <Tama> well, you were in.
[02:50:32] * naw left the chat.
[03:14:52] * Tama left the chat.
[03:14:53] * Tama joined the chat.
[03:16:07] <Tama> :3 louiz', you doing alright?
[03:25:57] * scippio left the chat.
[03:26:44] * scippio joined the chat.
[03:35:05] * Lakkris joined the chat.
[03:37:41] * CoyoSwift joined the chat.
[03:38:15] <CoyoSwift> oooh, this swift client is really advanced.
[03:38:54] <CoyoSwift> it appears to use qt4 for the widget toolkit. maybe i should use the same?
[03:39:23] * Tama left the chat.
[03:42:16] <MattJ> Qt isn't bad, as toolkits go
[03:43:21] <CoyoSwift> i cant wait till KDE4 offers a form of Plasma for Windows
[03:43:44] <CoyoSwift> plasma for windows would make windows metro a lot more palatable.
[03:44:18] <CoyoSwift> unfortunately, i'm addicted to pc games, so one of my computers needs to have windows. but i dont have to like it.
[03:44:41] <CoyoSwift> MattJ: so how are ya feeling?
[03:44:53] <MattJ> er, fine thank you
[03:45:18] <CoyoSwift> that's good.
[03:45:32] <MattJ> You?
[03:45:57] <CoyoSwift> the swift client i just found and downloaded is really shiny. still feels very experimental, but very promising. i'm feeling
pretty good right now.
[03:46:26] <CoyoSwift> thanks for asking :3
[03:47:40] <CoyoSwift> i am just ACHING to look at the source code for this client.
[03:58:54] <CoyoSwift> :D
[03:59:20] <CoyoSwift> oh, question for all of you: is it possible to link conference servers together irc-style? for scalability, etc?
[04:03:06] <MattJ> Generally no, currently
[04:03:22] <MattJ> It's certainly possible, but there is no accepted standard for it yet that's implemented in servers
[04:03:41] <CoyoSwift> okay. is there any particular cultural reason why not, or it is more a matter of no one's had the time or reason to do it?
[04:03:45] <CoyoSwift> oh.
[04:03:53] <CoyoSwift> well, that sounds like something i could do..
[04:04:06] <MattJ> I don't think that many people have need of it
[04:04:36] <CoyoSwift> are conference servers really that fast?
[04:04:48] <CoyoSwift> that you can have a single server run thousands of mucs?
[04:06:02] <CoyoSwift> what if your conference server gets really really really popular? what if you have thousands upon thousands of very active
chatrooms?
[04:08:28] <MattJ> Then you'll usually use your server's clustering ability, if it has that
[04:08:48] <deryni> I was just about to ask how we jumped past clustering here.
[04:09:05] <deryni> Since that's all irc server linking is as far as I know.
[04:11:10] <CoyoSwift> oh. well this server seems to support clustering http://www.isode.com/products/m-link-clustering.html
[04:11:28] <CoyoSwift> i dont know what other servers support that.
[04:15:36] <CoyoSwift> http://community.igniterealtime.org/community/developers/openfire-clustering ah.
[04:19:46] <MattJ> deryni, true - I'm tired and have been reading too many DMUC XEPs this week
[04:20:19] <deryni> Heh.
[04:20:55] <CoyoSwift> http://www.ejabberd.im/node/5063 this also seems doable.
[04:20:56] <deryni> Sleep and dream of shining webs of DMUC nodes?
[04:21:03] <CoyoSwift> dmuc?
[04:21:10] <MattJ> deryni, it's getting to that point
[04:21:51] <deryni> Distributed muc. One of the specs that MattJ alluded to before (for distributing a single muc room over multiple domains iirc).
[04:22:49] <CoyoSwift> oh, COOL!
[04:23:21] <deryni> One point of note "clustering" doesn't necessarily mean support for clustered muc servers (I know ejabberd's support didn't
include that for a very long time... if it even does now).
[04:23:36] <MattJ> It apparently does now
[04:23:50] <deryni> I thought I recalled hearing that but couldn't remember.
[04:24:09] <CoyoSwift> so dmuc is the answer to irc. i wont have a reason to run an irc network. i can just run a dmuc network.
[04:25:00] <deryni> They aren't the same thing.
[04:25:28] <deryni> A clustered xmpp muc service is the same thing as an irc network. dmuc is like the bridging services that operate between
irc networks.
[04:26:19] <CoyoSwift> okay.
[04:26:25] <CoyoSwift> /me writes this down.
[04:27:32] <CoyoSwift> cxms network
[04:28:32] <CoyoSwift> cxms -> clustered xmpp muc service
[04:28:43] <CoyoSwift> cxms > irc
[04:29:00] <CoyoSwift> or at least it will soon be.
[04:29:34] <deryni> If you say so.
[04:30:02] <CoyoSwift> /me shrugs
[04:30:18] <CoyoSwift> i believe in xmpp
[04:30:57] <CoyoSwift> i think xmpp would be excellent as a replacement for irc, providing a global federation between clustered xmpp muc service
networks.
[04:34:09] <deryni> I've never seen why we need an irc replacement, personally.
[04:36:03] <MattJ> *cough*
[04:36:11] <MattJ> *choke*
[04:36:19] <CoyoSwift> well. think about it. i connect to over 20 irc networks, and sometimes i find myself wishing i could connect to just one,
and use federation to connect to all the others.
[04:36:34] <CoyoSwift> you okay, mattj?
[04:36:53] <MattJ> I will be when deryni admits that IRC must die
[04:36:58] <CoyoSwift> XD
[04:37:08] <CoyoSwift> i agree. irc really needs to kick the bucket.
[04:37:17] <CoyoSwift> xmpp is potentially so much better.
[04:38:04] <deryni> What is the meaningful benefit, in xmpp, to being able to connect to room1@muc.service.com, ..., room20@muc.service.com as
opposed to room1@muc.service.com, room2@muc.other.com, ..., room20@muc.blah.com?
[04:38:33] <deryni> That is, xmpp servers already federate, you don't need dmuc to keep your number of connections down.
[04:38:58] <deryni> You are *already* only connecting to one xmpp server.
[04:39:13] <CoyoSwift> well, the advantage to irc is that it scales fairly well, using a single domain. if a single domain is very popular, you run
into problems, unless you use clustering using dmuc
[04:39:31] <deryni> I didn't follow that.
[04:39:48] <CoyoSwift> clustered xmpp muc services using dmuc could possibly be the answer to really large and popular mucs, and many on the same
domain.
[04:40:03] <deryni> You don't need dmuc for a room hosted on one domain.
[04:40:14] <deryni> Clustered muc servers handle that.
[04:40:17] <CoyoSwift> one domain, many servers.
[04:40:23] <deryni> Yes, clustering.
[04:40:24] <deryni> Not dmuc.
[04:40:35] <CoyoSwift> isnt dmuc the protocol used for clustering?
[04:40:37] <deryni> The same way an irc network works.
[04:40:38] <deryni> No.
[04:40:48] <deryni> clustering is a server internal.
[04:40:50] <CoyoSwift> then what is dmuc?
[04:41:03] <deryni> Like I said, splitting a single room over multiple domains (again assuming I recall correctly).
[04:41:11] <CoyoSwift> oh, okay.
[04:41:22] <CoyoSwift> i was confused, i apologize.
[04:41:57] <CoyoSwift> so clustered muc services is considered something that each server should handle individually? that i falls outside the scope
of standardization?
[04:42:11] <CoyoSwift> i dunno.. shouldnt we standardize the clustering protocol?
[04:42:18] <deryni> You can't standardize something like that.
[04:42:25] <CoyoSwift> why not?
[04:42:34] <deryni> It is intensely sensitive and dependent on internals.
[04:43:26] <CoyoSwift> the details of the internals can be abstracted away. i see no reason why this cant be standardized, but hey, what do i know?
i'm just a kid.
[04:43:52] <CoyoSwift> /me thinks..
[04:44:35] <deryni> I mean, nothing prevents you from clustering over xmpp itself I suppose but that's likely to perform poorly, map badly to
your internal architecture, and not gain you much of anything since you still aren't going to realistically run components
from various providers in a cluster.
[04:45:28] <CoyoSwift> hmm.
[04:45:51] <CoyoSwift> well, i wasnt thinking of xmpp muc servers, i was thinking of gateways that would cluster in as though it were another of
the same.
[04:46:03] <deryni> Hm?
[04:46:19] <CoyoSwift> as it is, you'd have to implement every individual clustering protocol
[04:46:25] <CoyoSwift> in order to gateway in that way.
[04:46:39] <deryni> I don't understand what component you are envisioning building here.
[04:46:55] <CoyoSwift> but i guess this is already handled, since xmpp servers provide for gateways natively, right?
[04:47:12] <deryni> Gateways to legacy protocols connect to xmpp servers via xmpp.
[04:47:28] <CoyoSwift> interserver federation xmpp?
[04:47:43] <deryni> xmpp servers communicate with each other via xmpp.
[04:47:48] <CoyoSwift> okay.
[04:48:02] <CoyoSwift> so the gateway acts like any other xmpp server.
[04:48:08] <CoyoSwift> no clustering necessary.
[04:48:20] <CoyoSwift> understood. thank you, that was very helpful.
[04:48:31] <CoyoSwift> i really appreciate it. :3
[04:48:58] <deryni> The legacy protocol gateways? They connect as components (via xmpp) to xmpp servers. Then they take the traffic they get from
your client (via xmpp) and translate it into the legacy protocol.
[04:50:26] <CoyoSwift> components?
[04:51:59] <CoyoSwift> hmm. looking up xmpp components
[05:40:32] * MattJ left the chat.
[05:54:46] * Asterix joined the chat.
[06:00:47] <CoyoSwift> /me yawns
[06:08:56] * Asterix left the chat.
[06:18:50] * guus joined the chat.
[06:45:59] <CoyoSwift> eeeee!
[06:46:20] <CoyoSwift> /me is so excited, cant wait to read psa's book over christmas holiday!
[06:58:56] * scippio left the chat.
[07:15:42] * Tobias joined the chat.
[07:37:36] * Tobias left the chat.
[07:41:50] * nabatt joined the chat.
[07:54:48] * Tobias joined the chat.
[08:04:16] <CoyoSwift> http://my.pages.de/dsn-vn/ interesting perspective.
[08:08:06] * Tobias left the chat.
[08:09:00] * marseille left the chat.
[08:30:39] * marseille joined the chat.
[08:34:49] * lastsky joined the chat.
[08:34:57] * lastsky left the chat.
[08:41:46] <dwd> louiz’, My point (made a while back, and now made in code in M-Link R15) was that a PEP subsystem *can* do persistent items,
*can* do collections, and *can* do affiliations. Gajim, out of the box, even supports pubsub configure operations on PEP nodes,
which means I can do some fairly magical stuff right now with off the shelf clients.
[08:43:04] <CoyoSwift> oooh, neat.
[08:46:44] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[09:04:45] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[09:07:55] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Incidentally, my goal with our full-pubsub-inna-PEP was to get Buddycloud working off PEP, but the problem there
is actually that there's no specification, and that makes scheduling the work (ie, committing our resources) very difficult
indeed.
[09:10:22] * Treebilou left the chat.
[09:17:54] <CoyoSwift> i see.
[09:18:22] <CoyoSwift> that sucks.
[09:23:50] * petermount joined the chat.
[09:42:24] * Tamaska joined the chat.
[10:17:39] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[10:24:56] <CoyoSwift> i have been reading some old mailing list archives
[10:26:30] <CoyoSwift> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2007-July/016088.html this says that, during 2009, most servers did not support
proper tls federation with sasl external (where both present valid certificates).
now i realize that certificates are really expensive, and that most people dont want to bother with them. but this was a long
time ago. 2009. i'm sure this has been fixed already.
[10:27:03] <CoyoSwift> wait. i am confused.
[10:27:06] <CoyoSwift> never mind.
[10:27:24] <CoyoSwift> herp a durp.
[10:27:30] <CoyoSwift> so how's everyone feeling?
[10:27:47] * Neustradamus joined the chat.
[10:32:13] * nabatt left the chat.
[10:32:26] * nabatt joined the chat.
[10:40:36] * naw joined the chat.
[10:51:27] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[10:56:06] * Tobias joined the chat.
[10:58:48] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Yeah, that was 2007. "Proper" X.509 auth is actually quite hard, and I think there's still only a small number
of server implementations that do everything, particularly handling revoked certs and suchlike.
[11:00:47] <Tamaska> oh, that's good to know.
[11:02:17] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Incidentally, full X.509 auth is required by the US military, and multiple implementations are almost through their
formal testing, plus the XSF itself did interop on this issue about a year ago.
[11:02:37] <CoyoSwift> awesome!
[11:02:44] <CoyoSwift> that means this will soon be a nonissue.
[11:02:57] <Kev> Not *exactly*.
[11:03:03] <Kev> It means there are servers available that will do this.
[11:03:18] <Kev> It doesn't mean those are the servers that people deploy, or that people will deploy valid certs.
[11:03:18] <dwd> And even that your server may be able to do this.
[11:03:26] <dwd> Right.
[11:03:28] <CoyoSwift> i hear there are cert authorities that will give out xmpp certs for free.
[11:03:36] <dwd> CoyoSwift, There's at least one.
[11:04:21] <dwd> CoyoSwift, In practise, though, there's two types of certs. Ones specific for a service, and ones that only authenticate a
domain. (this is a seperate issue from the validation levels).
[11:04:24] <CoyoSwift> http://cert.startcom.org/
[11:04:30] <CoyoSwift> oh, i see.
[11:05:03] <dwd> CoyoSwift, StartCom indeed give out XMPP service-specific certs, which in principle means that they couldn't be used for a
website, say. This is by intention, incidentally.
[11:05:16] <CoyoSwift> obviously.
[11:05:23] <CoyoSwift> the intent is to promote themselves.
[11:05:26] <CoyoSwift> which is smart.
[11:05:28] <dwd> CoyoSwift, But a pure domain cert - ie, not service-specific - should also work just fine for XMPP.
[11:05:38] <CoyoSwift> okay.
[11:05:45] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Oh, they give out free ones for websites *too*.
[11:05:50] <Kev> ...As long as you have the right domains in it...
[11:05:54] <dwd> RIght.
[11:07:43] <CoyoSwift> this is neat, though. at least i know low-cost ssl certs are available.
[11:08:40] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Oh, certainly. Although I'd note our current code doesn't work against CACert, for instance.
[11:08:51] <CoyoSwift> ouch.
[11:10:08] <CoyoSwift> i wonder if it's possible to use pgp for domains.
[11:10:11] <dwd> Because CACert distribute their CRLs over HTTPS, which leaves us a chicken/egg problem before we start - CRLs are themselves
signed, so it's hard to mount a reasonable attack here.
[11:10:33] <CoyoSwift> heh.
[11:10:57] <dwd> CoyoSwift, In principle, yes, but it's no longer zero-knowledge, which makes it much harder. That is, PGP keys are fine if
and only if you know what key you're expecting, and/or can go ask someone else to validate the key for you.
[11:11:26] <CoyoSwift> well, that's what fingerprinting is for, isnt it?
[11:11:37] <CoyoSwift> i guess that's impractical for s2s, though..
[11:11:55] <CoyoSwift> since everytime it changes, you have to manually confirm identity
[11:12:01] <dwd> CoyoSwift, Well, yes. And you can do fingerprinting with X.509 certs, too. But as you say, that just doesn't work for S2S.
[11:12:10] <CoyoSwift> yeah.
[11:26:24] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[11:27:11] * Treebilou left the chat.
[11:27:14] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[12:00:30] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[12:03:12] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[12:05:12] * scippio joined the chat.
[12:05:31] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[12:25:24] * loxs@loxs.org joined the chat.
[12:26:05] <loxs@loxs.org> is it possible for a service (external component with jid of a type service.host.com) join a MUC room?
[12:28:04] <Kev> In principle it should be.
[12:28:18] <Kev> I wouldn't swear that it'd work againsty any given implementation, though.
[12:28:53] <Kev> Although given that a component could easily join as blah@service.host.com instead, this shouldn't be an issue.
[12:32:09] * Florob joined the chat.
[12:38:08] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[13:11:22] <loxs@loxs.org> hmm, didn't know that
[13:11:22] <loxs@loxs.org> thanks
[13:12:13] * scippio left the chat.
[13:12:17] * scippio joined the chat.
[13:40:50] * jcea joined the chat.
[13:41:36] <petermount> loxs: I do something similar here, have a component called service.host.com but when it talks to various other components
it uses blah@service.host.com when I know the service can't handle it. All stanzas still get routed to the component so it
works
[13:42:31] <loxs@loxs.org> I see, thanks
[13:45:01] <dwd> loxs@loxs.org, I think Buddycloud do something similar, because Google couldn't handle domain-style jids at the time for something.
[13:59:33] * deryni left the chat.
[14:04:42] <loxs@loxs.org> hmm, psi used to have a xmpp console, where's that gone?
[14:05:38] <Kev> It hasn't moved.
[14:05:48] <Kev> Right click the account header->XML Console.
[14:06:04] <loxs@loxs.org> ah, right, thanks
[14:18:54] * guus left the chat.
[14:19:09] * petermount left the chat.
[14:19:10] * Treebilou left the chat.
[14:23:47] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[14:24:19] * petermount joined the chat.
[14:25:52] * Treebilou joined the chat.
[14:26:08] * guus joined the chat.
[14:29:14] * Tobias left the chat.
[14:30:14] * lastsky joined the chat.
[14:42:08] * naw left the chat.
[14:46:38] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[14:49:20] * naw joined the chat.
[14:55:59] * deryni joined the chat.
[14:56:04] * lastsky left the chat.
[15:15:42] * naw left the chat.
[15:17:05] * naw joined the chat.
[15:20:06] * naw left the chat.
[15:21:13] * naw joined the chat.
[15:45:03] * darkrain_ joined the chat.
[16:03:35] * scippio left the chat.
[16:07:17] * nabatt left the chat.
[16:09:26] * psa joined the chat.
[16:10:40] * nielsvh joined the chat.
[16:22:09] * naw left the chat.
[16:24:15] * Tobias joined the chat.
[16:25:13] * naw joined the chat.
[16:35:08] * MattJ joined the chat.
[16:41:13] * Tobias left the chat.
[16:46:14] * nielsvh left the chat.
[16:50:23] * Tobias joined the chat.
[16:56:11] * evilotto joined the chat.
[16:56:20] * guus left the chat.
[17:01:38] * loxs@loxs.org left the chat.
[17:03:55] * Florob left the chat.
[17:03:56] * Florob joined the chat.
[17:34:13] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[17:51:23] * petermount left the chat.
[18:21:41] * stpeter joined the chat.
[18:49:26] * Tobias left the chat.
[18:54:24] * naw left the chat.
[19:27:42] * Asterix joined the chat.
[19:36:19] <CoyoSwift> good morning, jabber devs
[19:37:01] <CoyoSwift> or rather, good afternoon, since i stayed up till 5 am cst (gmt -6) chattering about xmpp
[19:43:23] <CoyoSwift> psa, kev: i cant wait to try the new swift 2.0 xmpp client, when it comes out for win32
[19:50:50] * Link Mauve left the chat.
[19:52:43] * Link Mauve joined the chat.
[19:53:31] * Link Mauve left the chat.
[19:56:47] * Link Mauve joined the chat.
[20:03:52] * naw joined the chat.
[20:05:55] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[20:16:59] * deryni left the chat.
[20:18:54] * nielsvh joined the chat.
[20:19:07] * nielsvh left the chat.
[20:19:10] * Minos_ joined the chat.
[20:19:38] * Minos_ left the chat.
[20:30:55] * stpeter left the chat.
[20:31:11] * psa left the chat.
[20:32:22] * psa joined the chat.
[20:44:32] <Lakkris> /me yawns, and stretches.
[20:44:42] <Lakkris> this is going to be a good day. i can feel it.
[20:50:04] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:50:05] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:50:05] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:50:05] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:51:53] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:51:53] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:52:49] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:52:49] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:52:49] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:52:49] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:54:26] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:54:27] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:54:27] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:54:27] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[20:56:54] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[20:56:54] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:01:56] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:01:56] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:04:17] * Asterix left the chat.
[21:04:25] * Asterix joined the chat.
[21:05:40] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:05:40] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:05:40] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:05:40] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:06:58] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:06:58] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:12:01] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:12:01] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:13:40] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:13:40] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:13:40] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:13:40] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:17:03] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:17:03] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:19:03] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:19:03] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:19:03] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:19:03] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:19:05] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:19:05] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:19:40] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:19:40] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:20:39] * michaellundberg.ietf@gmail.com joined the chat.
[21:20:40] * michaellundberg.ietf@gmail.com left the chat.
[21:22:05] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[21:22:05] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[21:24:33] * Florob left the chat.
[21:27:07] * Paul Peard joined the chat.
[22:15:57] * Tobias joined the chat.
[22:17:35] * Lakkris left the chat.
[22:18:29] * CoyoSwift left the chat.
[22:18:42] * Tamaska left the chat.
[22:20:16] * CoyoSwift joined the chat.
[22:28:45] * scippio joined the chat.
[22:31:04] * CoyoSwift left the chat.
[22:40:07] * CoyoSwift joined the chat.
[22:53:13] <CoyoSwift> :3
[22:53:47] <CoyoSwift> i wonder if lua would be a good language to start with... i'm looking at it, seems easy enough..
[22:54:42] <Tobias> start what
[22:54:43] <Tobias> ?
[22:55:14] <louiz’> coding?
[22:55:35] <Tobias> ahhh
[22:56:03] <CoyoSwift> start coding.
[22:56:04] <CoyoSwift> yeah.
[22:56:25] <CoyoSwift> i'm a complete beginner, though i've played with java a little.
[23:00:46] * Asterix left the chat.
[23:17:45] * Paul Peard left the chat.
[23:26:10] * psa left the chat.
[23:44:08] * Tobias left the chat.