Logs for jdev@conference.jabber.org

Show join/part/nick changes:

[00:28:56] * Tobias left the chat.
[06:53:30] * waqas left the chat.
[08:31:31] * Tobias joined the chat.
[08:41:58] * ermine joined the chat.
[08:51:24] * ermine left the chat.
[08:51:24] * ermine joined the chat.
[09:00:43] * Tobias joined the chat.
[09:03:34] * Tobias left the chat.
[09:38:58] * KevWalke joined the chat.
[10:05:09] * Tobias left the chat.
[10:19:11] * Flow joined the chat.
[10:48:38] * Tobias joined the chat.
[11:01:45] * Tobias left the chat.
[11:36:24] * naw joined the chat.
[11:45:37] * Asterix joined the chat.
[11:48:56] * Asterix left the chat.
[12:26:45] * tato joined the chat.
[13:04:00] * Tobias joined the chat.
[13:07:26] * tato joined the chat.
[13:19:45] * tato left the chat.
[13:22:35] * Tobias left the chat.
[13:25:24] * tato left the chat.
[14:20:17] * test111 joined the chat.
[14:20:31] * test111 left the chat.
[14:39:18] * Tobias joined the chat.
[14:43:40] * waqas joined the chat.
[14:45:16] * Tobias left the chat.
[15:44:55] * Tobias joined the chat.
[15:52:54] * Tobias left the chat.
[16:33:38] * Tobias joined the chat.
[16:52:47] * Tobias left the chat.
[16:53:26] * Maranda joined the chat.
[16:58:02] * Maranda left the chat.
[17:29:52] * Tobias joined the chat.
[17:37:49] * westsibe joined the chat.
[17:38:11] * Tobias left the chat.
[17:44:52] * waqas left the chat.
[17:44:55] * waqas joined the chat.
[17:47:52] * westsibe left the chat.
[17:47:54] * dipr.la joined the chat.
[17:50:25] * KevWalke left the chat.
[18:04:17] * KevWalke joined the chat.
[18:12:40] * Maranda joined the chat.
[18:25:52] <> Hmm I have a Message Carbons question, is there a reason to not avoid forking to the top resource if carbons enabled and if that is supposed to receive messages normally (non negative priority)?
[18:25:53] * arcriley left the chat.
[18:25:55] * Zash left the chat.
[18:28:10] <> I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you asking that for a to=barejid message, when a non-negative priority resource exists, you shouldn't do carbons?
[18:28:28] <> Yes you shouldn't do forking
[18:28:50] <> or that resource will receive both the message to the bare jid and the one to the full one
[18:29:16] <> << When the server receives a <message/> of type "chat" addressed to a bare JID (localpart@domainpart), it delivers a copy to each Carbons-enabled resource for the bare JID – in addition to delivering according to RFC 6121 § 8.5.2. This process is sometimes called "forking". >>
[18:29:31] <> ^ I think this text presumes that should be the way
[18:29:44] <> ^ I think this text premises that should be the way
[18:30:18] <> Err, you are supposed to send that message to that resource only once. Carbons shouldn't cause double messages to be sent to a resource.
[18:32:03] <> waqas, for the forked messages (to full jids) yeah but << in addition to delivering according to RFC 6121 >> means the top resource should still receive the message directed to the bare jid.
[18:32:19] <> if that's not the case that bit should be rewrote.
[18:33:10] <> I think the text is unclear or wrong here then, because it certainly shouldn't cause duplicate messages no matter what
[18:33:31] * bear joined the chat.
[18:33:34] <> Implementing literally it does ^^
[18:35:03] * Zash joined the chat.
[18:35:21] <> Zash: You implemented this, did you run into this?
[18:36:45] <> Could you summarize what 'this' is?
[18:36:52] * KevWalke left the chat.
[18:36:54] <> Maranda: At the end of that section: "A Carbons-enabled resource MUST NOT receive more than one copy of the <message/>."
[18:38:17] <> I made exceptions for the top resources that would get the message by normal routing rules
[18:38:30] <> waqas, yes but the message to the bare jid is not to be considered a copy? (me thinks that's the original)
[18:39:19] <> I think I posted to some list about that
[18:39:20] <> And I did except the message to be routed to the top resource as well, but I thought I could have broken the xep in doing so.
[18:39:43] <> (if non negative that is)
[18:40:25] <> Well, lets keep the end goal in mind: All of the user's carbons enabled clients should display the same thing. If they don't, then that's a spec or implementation bug.
[18:40:39] <> So you should always read the spec with that in mind
[18:41:19] <> Which makes a resource receiving duplicate messages Wrong™
[18:41:57] <> Agreed™
[18:42:44] <> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-October/025382.html this thread?
[18:48:30] * bear left the chat.
[18:48:38] <> Yep
[18:49:05] <> Examples 9 and 10 show that there are no carbon'd messages sent. That's the only thing that matters ;)
[18:50:39] <> Code-by-example wins again?
[18:51:57] * KevWalke joined the chat.
[18:53:07] <> Every time
[18:53:11] * KevWalke left the chat.
[18:54:03] * KevWalke joined the chat.
[19:11:57] * bear joined the chat.
[19:23:54] * xnyhps joined the chat.
[19:28:14] * ermine left the chat.
[19:29:26] * Tobias joined the chat.
[19:39:14] * dipr.la left the chat.
[19:42:28] * bear left the chat.
[19:42:52] * bear joined the chat.
[19:44:17] * Maranda left the chat.
[19:52:07] * Tobias left the chat.
[20:26:33] * waqas left the chat.
[21:14:09] * Asterix joined the chat.
[21:21:45] * Zash left the chat.
[21:54:34] * KevWalke left the chat.
[21:54:34] * KevWalke joined the chat.
[22:09:26] * Asterix left the chat.
[22:14:54] * tato joined the chat.
[22:16:45] * Neustradamus joined the chat.
[22:21:35] * waqas joined the chat.
[22:31:03] * Neustradamus left the chat.
[22:32:55] * Flow left the chat.
[22:37:36] * waqas left the chat.
[22:49:46] * 0xAFFE joined the chat.
[22:54:07] * tato left the chat.
[23:24:10] * naw left the chat.
[23:44:37] * KevWalke left the chat.
[23:53:43] * Tobias joined the chat.
[23:57:41] * 0xAFFE left the chat.