Gajim - 2013-08-18


  1. bot RSS: Feeds for Gajim • BiDi edited Added precise ticket references to Nick & /me (diff) https://trac.gajim.org/wiki/BiDi?version=28
  2. cc466b56 dicson, client icons plugin xmpp:miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru?join (Miranda NG)
  3. cc466b56 Should Gajim support :// <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4622#section-2.3>?
  4. Link Mauve cc466b56, in the case of multi-accounts, where the sender wants a response from a specific account?
  5. cc466b56 I don't know, or I don't understand the question
  6. Link Mauve I wonder the usecase you want to support.
  7. cc466b56 http://miranda-ng.org/ use this xmpp://miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru?join
  8. cc466b56 Even Psi does not phrase xmpp://
  9. Link Mauve cc466b56, that is a bug, nobody can authenticate as miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru.
  10. Link Mauve At least, not an user.
  11. cc466b56 So xmpp:// is preserved only for users, not muc, correct?
  12. Link Mauve The section you linked is clear, this means the website asks your XMPP client to prove it’s miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru.
  13. Link Mauve The only case I can think of is when an entity is aware you are using multiple accounts and wants you to use a specific one for some action.
  14. Link Mauve cc466b56, you should tell them to change the link to xmpp:miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru?join, it’s an error on their part.
  15. Link Mauve Maybe they didn’t read that spec, or just thought it would be the same as http.
  16. cc466b56 I told them to change, but this was their respond: [12:48:53 PM] Kxepal: Gajim: also, probably http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5122#section-2.2 more correct. it defines why xmpp:// and xmpp: exists [12:51:29 PM] Kxepal: cc466b56: I believe it's a hidden adv which should be read as: "Switch to Miranda! We're support this stuff and more!" (:
  17. Link Mauve Indeed, both exist, but they don’t have the same meaning at all.
  18. Link Mauve 2.3 is what they should read, 2.2 only defines the syntax.
  19. Link Mauve And if Miranda accepts that URI as “join the room miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru”, it’s a bug that should be fixed.
  20. Link Mauve Report a bug maybe.
  21. bot RSS: Feeds for Gajim • Ticket #7432 (When Gajim just started it show every presence as notify) created Bug description When i run gajim it connected to server and then disconnected (it's wired too). After reconnection it show every status of contact as notify and my screen was filled by the[…] https://trac.gajim.org/ticket/7432 • Ticket #5481 (Use Windows-lookalike-theme on Windows by default.) updated ​g[…] https://trac.gajim.org/ticket/5481#comment:7
  22. Kxepal Link Mauve: hi there(: cc466b56 pointed me to ask you about difference between xmpp:// and xmpp: and why xmpp:// is wrong. may I?
  23. Link Mauve I didn’t even know xmpp:// before he told me about it, but it is an URI asking for a specific user.
  24. Link Mauve Look at RFC 5122, section 2.3.
  25. Link Mauve xmpp:jid1 is an identifier for jid1, xmpp://jid2 asks the user to authenticate as jid2, xmpp://jid3/jid4 asks the user to authenticate as jid3 before doing an action with jid4.
  26. Kxepal Link Mauve: oh..I have to read more than one section before arguing about (:
  27. Link Mauve As I said to cc466b56, the only use case I see for an xmpp:// URI is when an entity is aware an user has more than one JID and wants him to interact with them using a specific one.
  28. Link Mauve So I guess it’s just a bug in your URI parser, where you assume xmpp: and xmpp:// to be the same.
  29. Kxepal that's could be true for Miranda - you may have multiple xmpp accounts for single user
  30. Kxepal however, it doesn't asks about which one to choose
  31. Kxepal reading the related code..
  32. Link Mauve The basic idea is that if the user clicks on an xmpp:// link, they should use the account matching the bare JID that follows. This isn’t what you want on your website, you can’t know which JID will be used to join your room.
  33. Link Mauve You can be sure it won’t be miranda-ng@conference.jabber.ru though. :)
  34. Kxepal Link Mauve: thank you for explanations! I'd got the difference and we'd fixed site uri, but I still don't understand how (and why) xmpp:// are processed in the same way as xmpp: ... however, I feel this question is for other conference (:
  35. Link Mauve jdev@conference.jabber.org is a good place for that kind of question.
  36. Kxepal bookmarked, thanks(:
  37. Maranda Any plan to support MAM in Gajim :)?
  38. Darlan What is MAM?
  39. Maranda http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html
  40. Darlan I read on it on Jappix lately.
  41. Darlan Ope a ticket
  42. Darlan Open a ticket
  43. hoody_k Hope a ticket :p
  44. Link Mauve I think Asterix has already started an implementation.
  45. Link Mauve Not sure, but he was interested.
  46. Maranda and poezio :P?
  47. mathieui I swore to only do it after releasing a new version (last was a year ago), but it will be done soon after that
  48. mmlosh is trapped into reading up about MAM
  49. mmlosh the link doesn't seem to work for me, though
  50. Maranda only got trapped when he had to implement RSM correctly.
  51. Link Mauve mmlosh, basically, it’s server-side archives made simple.
  52. mmlosh history sync for non-encrypted messages? that sounds indeed useful
  53. Maranda not so "simple", but torward that way.
  54. mmlosh hmm.. that will work only for non-encrypted messages, so it won't be THAT useful
  55. mmlosh well.. unless the client would report decrypted messages back to the server during sync :D
  56. mmlosh I guess I would be interested in some kind of "distributed history" - clients sharing the history with each otehr, without storing the plaintext messages on the server
  57. Maranda I don't think any MAM implementation is supposed to log encrypted messages at all
  58. Maranda (Metronome's implementation ditches both OTR and E2E messages)