WikiTeki /  attachment:pidgin-invisibility.txt de JeanChristopheAndré/ÀFaire

   1 ###### 2007-04-25 irc.freenode.org #pidgin
   2 <Progfou> hi there
   3 <Progfou> I'm looking for some pointer about an issue with Gaim
   4 <Progfou> I look in the FAQ and the bug tracker from Trac but can't find it
   5 <Progfou> issue is: unable to get invisible with Gaim, while it's working with Psi on the same server
   6 <LSchiere2> Progfou: grab beta6
   7 <Progfou> we are already using beta6, and the bug still shows up :( same thing with Windows or Linux
   8 <deryni> Progfou: There is no real jabber invisible protocol yet.
   9 <LSchiere2> Progfou: it should work if you select invisible in the status selector
  10 <LSchiere2> ah, I stand corrected
  11 <deryni> There is an old, deprecated, and invalid xmpp method which some clients and server still use/allow.
  12 <deryni> An overly complicated privacy list based method, and there was work on a newer one last I looked.
  13 <deryni> I don't know what the story with the new one is at the moment.
  14 <Progfou> ok, that's the kind of information I was looking for
  15 <deryni> 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.
  16 <Progfou> yes deryni, I just tried and Psi is using this way
  17 <deryni> 1) Only on servers that don't claim to be xmpp compatible, since they are supposed to kick you off for sending that.
  18 <Progfou> oh... but we are using the standard jabberd 1.4.3... I'm sad to learn it's not behaving as expected :(
  19 <deryni> 2) I don't believe pidgin's jabber support claims to support invisible.
  20 <deryni> Lots of servers don't kick people off for that for a number of reasons, in large part because old clients would start breaking.
  21 <deryni> And by 'standard' you mean you didn't patch it, right?
  22 <Progfou> exactly
  23 <deryni> Isn't 1.4.3 really old?
  24 <Progfou> any hint about a new presence/invisibility standard to come? I saw XEP 18 was rejected
  25 <Progfou> 1.4.3 old: yes, and we already planned to change it (it's on a production server you know...)
  26 <Progfou> but I was not sure if it was a client or server side problem
  27 <deryni> XEP-0018 is what Psi is using.
  28 <deryni> I think 1.4.3 has known crash bugs and DOS issues.
  29 <deryni> But it's been ages since I've looked at it.
  30 <Progfou> 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?
  31 <deryni> Yes.
  32 <Progfou> ok, so we will do without it for now
  33 <deryni> XEP-0186 is the 'new' method I was talking about.
  34 <Progfou> (without invisibility I mean, not without Gaim ;-))
  35 <Progfou> ah! is there anybody working on it? planned for 3.0 if I read correctly?
  36 <deryni> I'm not at all sure what you were reading that would give you that impression.
  37 <deryni> And I don't know of anyone working on it in pidgin, nor do I know what the status of the XEP is.
  38 <Progfou> I'm not even sure myself, that's why I went here to ask in the first place ;-)
  39 <Progfou> status is still experimental, last updated 2007-01-30
  40 <Progfou> deryni: thanks a lot for all your information
  41 <Progfou> one last thing: would you allow me to use this publicy?
  42 <Progfou> I suppose yes since it was a public conversation, but just in case...
  43 <deryni> Progfou: Feel free to use it.
  44 <Progfou> thanks again
  45 <Progfou> have a nice day
  46 <Progfou> /who deryni
  47 #pidgin    deryni    ... (Etan Reisner)