Gajim - 2019-07-06


  1. beelze Hey guys! Recently I noticed ^Z isn't working at least in msg input field. Known bug? Or better to create an issue? 1.1.3 Linux.
  2. lovetox works for me
  3. lovetox what window mode do you use in Gajim?
  4. beelze lovetox‎, 1 for everything
  5. lovetox hm no works also for me there
  6. lovetox do you have a foreign language key board layout maybe?
  7. lovetox or use input methods, like russian on a englisch keyboard
  8. Mikaela Are you using Flatpak or Fcitx?
  9. Mikaela Are you using Flatpak and Fcitx?
  10. Mikaela If you are, the workaround is https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/2031#issuecomment-483800048 and app restart
  11. beelze lovetox‎, yes, checked it's only not working when russian layout is active. though still a serious bug for me :-)
  12. lovetox are you using Flatpak?
  13. beelze no, idk even what is it
  14. lovetox Mikaela, did you test that on flatpak with Gajim, should we also add this?
  15. Mikaela IIRC yes and I have added the override
  16. lovetox k thanks done
  17. lovetox beelze, yes you can open an issue about that, maybe i have later time to investigate this
  18. beelze ok
  19. beelze btw, i'm using easystroke https://github.com/thjaeger/easystroke and it's gestures aren't working when mouse cursor over the gajim window. not noticed yet such a behaviour with anything else
  20. lovetox report that on that project
  21. lovetox dont know what they are doing :)
  22. Mikaela ``` └┌(%:~/.local/share/flatpak/overrides)┌- cat org.gajim.Gajim [Session Bus Policy] org.freedesktop.portal.Fcitx=talk ``` and the file has been modified April 18th
  23. beelze lovetox‎, ok but I need something from you about mouse events interception or whatever, in general words. Otherwise easystroke developer can same the same «ask gajim developers because easystroke works everywhere except gajim» lol
  24. beelze lovetox‎, ok but I need something from you about mouse events interception or whatever, in general words. Otherwise easystroke developer can say the same «ask gajim developers because easystroke works everywhere except gajim» lol
  25. lovetox its not about that i dont want to help making it work
  26. lovetox but im not going and investigate why other projects dont work
  27. lovetox they can investigate why their application does not work with Gajim, and can report how to make it work if there is in fact something to do for Gajim
  28. beelze lovetox‎, as for me, the situation is different and the facts are: «all other gtk anf qt windows except gajim works with $PROGRAMNAME»
  29. beelze but of course you can choose any line of reasoning and do or not do everything you want or do not want
  30. lovetox Its just the most efficient, developers of the application will know why something does not work
  31. lovetox on their wiki is nothing that indicates other application have to "help" to make it work
  32. lovetox if other application have to do some special thing so their application works, they should write it down or report issues at the projects
  33. beelze lovetox‎, i do not want to argue, i'm a developer too.
  34. beelze but I see that easystroke works with _every_ app except gajim. Thus, gajim is doing something special with mouse events. It's obvious
  35. lovetox yes and im not denying that, but why would Gajim not use mouse events if we need them? As i said if they have special requirements that other applications have to fullfill so their application works they should write it down so other applications can decide to support that or not
  36. lovetox They dont write any limitations down, so i have to assume they think their application works independently of what other applications do
  37. lovetox this seems wrong, and you should tell them
  38. lovetox so either they can work around it, or release guidlines what applications have to do to support it
  39. beelze lovetox‎, I'm agreed with that, though only mostly, but easystroke developer can (and I'm sure he/she _will_) ask me – what kind of workaround you want me to implement?
  40. lovetox maybe he does not have to, maybe there is no workaround, maybe the only way to fix this is in Gajim
  41. beelze please understand me properly, i'm just trying to evade mutually blocking situation
  42. lovetox but he/she should tell the world, what GTK applications have to do to make easystroke work
  43. lovetox not every developer has to find out on his own by understanding easystroke source code
  44. Link Mauve lovetox, what is missing for video?
  45. Link Mauve It shouldn’t be any harder than audio for that purpose.
  46. lovetox no idea, didnt look into it, probably not much, only some little bug fix here and there
  47. lovetox but until now nobody had time to investigate this
  48. Link Mauve I can do that if you want.
  49. Link Mauve I’d like to have a working client to test my other implementation against.
  50. lovetox yeah would be appriciated
  51. Link Mauve Is it expected to work on a local network?
  52. beelze lovetox‎, i'm only trying to be constructive, not trying to force anyone to do something. I'm trying to find the good point to start resolving this issue. I'm a Python developer but I never been involved into GUI stuff so I can't resolve it myself
  53. Link Mauve I’m still bitter the Switch doesn’t have a microphone or camera. :(
  54. Link Mauve It would be so useful on it.
  55. lovetox beelze, you can by opening a issue against easystroke, they say their application works without any limitations
  56. lovetox you found one, it does not work with Gajim
  57. lovetox so they should investigate why, then apply a fix to easystroke OR tell Gajim developers what needs to be done to support easystroke
  58. lovetox and if Gajim can break easystroke, so can every other application
  59. lovetox so it should be documented on the easystroke project for all the developers that want to support easystroke
  60. beelze lovetox‎, i got the point, thanks. i'll try to file a bug to easystroke
  61. Link Mauve Easystroke seems to be specific to X11, you should verify that you’re indeed using that with Gajim.
  62. Link Mauve Gajim will first try to use Wayland, and only if it can’t it will fallback to X11.
  63. Link Mauve I’d expect any Wayland application to be totally invisible to Easystroke.
  64. Link Mauve And this feature should be ported to your compositor in that case.
  65. lovetox Link Mauve, i dont see why it should not work on local network, but all the network stuff is happening in farstream/gstreamer
  66. Link Mauve Ok.
  67. beelze Another question guys. What kind of URL's are treated as images? I see some direct links to images shows as thumbnails while others aren't
  68. lovetox images that are upoaded by the user via client
  69. lovetox you can enable to show all, in plugin preference
  70. beelze lovetox‎, show all turned on, but some images aren't showed. for instance:
  71. beelze http://begin-english.ru/img/upload/squirrel.jpg
  72. beelze checked Content-Type, it's image/jpeg
  73. beelze Link Mauve‎, i'm not using wayland at all. So all my apps are x11
  74. lovetox http://begin-english.ru/img/upload/squirrel.jpg
  75. lovetox its not https
  76. lovetox we only display https images
  77. beelze http images considered unsafe? 🤔
  78. Link Mauve beelze, of course.
  79. wurstsalat Hm, asterix, I do miss the bot. What is breaking it in the newest gitlab?
  80. Link Mauve Anything could modify them on the way.
  81. beelze > Anything could modify them on the way. .. but we can check exact content type after downloading.
  82. Link Mauve beelze, I mean, the image you receive could very well be an image too, just not the one I sent.
  83. Link Mauve With no way for you to notice that.
  84. Link Mauve Because any computer on the way could have modified it.
  85. beelze > beelze, I mean, the image you receive could very well be an image too, just not the one I sent. > With no way for you to notice that. i understand it, but prefer to leave the decision to myself. For instance, I can open any http:// in any browser if I want to
  86. Link Mauve That still sounds like a bad idea.
  87. Link Mauve No matter the user agent.
  88. Link Mauve Better tell your contact to setup TLS properly.
  89. beelze > That still sounds like a bad idea. > No matter the user agent. > Better tell your contact to setup TLS properly. there are still a lot of non-TLS resources and there are many possible valid explanations to not use them. Generally it isn't _free_ in fact. Because it's serious business.
  90. beelze I'm trying to explain that it is not expected for me "to be safer than even FF for instance". I guess it would be nice to have a disabled by default option to allow "potentially unsafe" images to be shown
  91. beelze In fact, any unencrypted messages (and images uploaded to) travelling via @any.xmpp.server are _unsafe_ Server administrator can easily change them.
  92. beelze And _generally_ we can't use encryption in XMPP. Because of encryption here is a workaround but not part od protocol. We can't even use encryption IRL (even in modern XMPP clients), only in edge cases. And this is _really_ unsafe comparing with http:// images.
  93. Link Mauve beelze, well, it’s possible with XMPP to be in control of your XMPP server.
  94. Link Mauve It’s not really feasible for most people to also be in control of their switches, routers, ISP, backbone, etc.
  95. beelze Link Mauve‎, of course yes. But IRL we have hundreds of XMPP servers but millions of XMPP users. Thus, user's choice is to trust XMPP servers and it's acceptable. But why showing plain http image is not acceptable? It's up to end user, exactly same as choosing «alien» XMPP server
  96. beelze and, Link Mauve‎, it's possible (to run onw XMPP server) but it is not _free_. At least you should buy reliable VPS but… it's not an easy task to provide high level of safety/security against hosting provider and government. It is _not_ possible for vast majority of XMPP users. Sorry, but IRL «it’s possible with XMPP to be in control of your XMPP server» more like a (unintentional maybe) demagogy
  97. Link Mauve beelze, when I was 14 I dug up the previous family computer, installed some Linux distribution on it and started having my own XMPP server.
  98. Link Mauve It didn’t cost anything but electricity and a few days of reading documentation.
  99. Link Mauve And I learnt a ton in the process, that alone was worth it.
  100. Link Mauve I was the hosting provider, and my government would have to come to my house (or make use of my possible lack of security) in order to obtain things.
  101. Link Mauve Which is definitely harder than through some centralised service they can just issue a warrant to.
  102. beelze Link Mauve‎, of course anyone can run anything on even smartphone, but every thing called «server» needed to have a stable link, dedicated platform, non-NATed address and so on.
  103. beelze Link Mauve‎, IRL in many-many-many countries after the first phone call from a Big Brother you will reveal all in hurry.
  104. Link Mauve lovetox, I have a user who’s using Gajim, and says they only got ten lines of history in a MAM-enabled room; what can they do to retrieve more than that?
  105. tryer Link Mauve: "centralised service they can just issue a warrant to" -- Ohh, lol. What is trusty and foolproof methods U can use for control that services? Staying 24/7 behind back of admin with Colt peacemaker? :)
  106. tryer beelze: "phone call from a Big Brother" -- Not only BB unfortunately.
  107. lovetox Link Mauve, Groupchat Menu -> Sync Threshold
  108. lovetox is set to 1 day on public rooms
  109. lovetox on private to everything
  110. lovetox so if this is a private room we should further investigate
  111. Link Mauve lovetox, this is jabberfr@’s room.
  112. lovetox so i guess not private
  113. Link Mauve Shouldn’t be.
  114. lovetox then set the sync threshold to something higher
  115. beelze I just trying to explain that is unproper to use a term safe/unsafe to any image that can be shown (or not shown) in the chat log. They're all unsafe (using the strict terms) because thay aren't end-to-end encrypted
  116. lovetox default on public MUCs is only request 1 day backwards
  117. Link Mauve lovetox, thanks.
  118. beelze So I see no reasons to not to allow users to see plain http images (it they want to). Of course, you alway can say «I just do not want them to do it» and it's ok because you're a developer. But it is not a common sense reason.
  119. wurstsalat Link Mauve: working video support would be much appreciated! ..and I'd definitively help to test things