###### 2007-04-25 irc.freenode.org #pidgin hi there I'm looking for some pointer about an issue with Gaim I look in the FAQ and the bug tracker from Trac but can't find it issue is: unable to get invisible with Gaim, while it's working with Psi on the same server Progfou: grab beta6 we are already using beta6, and the bug still shows up :( same thing with Windows or Linux Progfou: There is no real jabber invisible protocol yet. Progfou: it should work if you select invisible in the status selector ah, I stand corrected There is an old, deprecated, and invalid xmpp method which some clients and server still use/allow. An overly complicated privacy list based method, and there was work on a newer one last I looked. I don't know what the story with the new one is at the moment. ok, that's the kind of information I was looking for Progfou: If you open the Psi XML console and then go invisible and see "type='invisible'" or similar on a presence packet then they are using the old deprecated method. yes deryni, I just tried and Psi is using this way 1) Only on servers that don't claim to be xmpp compatible, since they are supposed to kick you off for sending that. oh... but we are using the standard jabberd 1.4.3... I'm sad to learn it's not behaving as expected :( 2) I don't believe pidgin's jabber support claims to support invisible. Lots of servers don't kick people off for that for a number of reasons, in large part because old clients would start breaking. And by 'standard' you mean you didn't patch it, right? exactly Isn't 1.4.3 really old? any hint about a new presence/invisibility standard to come? I saw XEP 18 was rejected 1.4.3 old: yes, and we already planned to change it (it's on a production server you know...) but I was not sure if it was a client or server side problem XEP-0018 is what Psi is using. I think 1.4.3 has known crash bugs and DOS issues. But it's been ages since I've looked at it. but, if I understand correctly, even after having changed the server, Gaim would not let us go invisible (because of lack of stanard way to do it), isn't it? Yes. ok, so we will do without it for now XEP-0186 is the 'new' method I was talking about. (without invisibility I mean, not without Gaim ;-)) ah! is there anybody working on it? planned for 3.0 if I read correctly? I'm not at all sure what you were reading that would give you that impression. And I don't know of anyone working on it in pidgin, nor do I know what the status of the XEP is. I'm not even sure myself, that's why I went here to ask in the first place ;-) status is still experimental, last updated 2007-01-30 deryni: thanks a lot for all your information one last thing: would you allow me to use this publicy? I suppose yes since it was a public conversation, but just in case... Progfou: Feel free to use it. thanks again have a nice day /who deryni #pidgin deryni ... (Etan Reisner)