5 ms·

File sharing, cross-device logs and encryption have been addressed in the last one-two years, pushed forward by Conversations on Android. However, getting that

by ge0rg 9y ago

File sharing, cross-device logs and encryption have been addressed in the last one-two years, pushed forward by Conversations on Android. However, getting that into other clients (e.g. on desktop/web) requires dedicated developers, and this is where XMPP currently lacks a little bit - not for lack of motivation but for lack of time.

dmitriid 9y ago
"Addressed" as in "most of the XEPs are marked as experimental and are subject to change".
- ge0rg 9y ago
  That might look a bit weird on the outside, but this is how protocol design works in the XSF. First you make a proposal (which is marked as Experimental), then you implement it and wait for other people to implement it as well, and then you look how well it works and whether it has rough edges that need fixing. If it is considered good, it moves on to Draft and then to Final [0]. This process could be faster for sure, but that requires independent developers to work on implementations and to share their experience. [0] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std
  - detaro 9y ago
    Is there a set of mobile and desktop clients that support all these things you said were "addressed" properly? People always parade Conversations, but if I want phone-only I already have to many messengers. Because if have to look through tables and bug trackers to figure out what client/server combination I can use (and have to pester my friends to use(!)) you can't count something as "addressed" IMHO. I still use only a very basic set of features with XMPP, because in my experience attempts to get anything advanced are way to time-intensive to be worth it for the few buddies still on XMPP, and I can't really push new people onto it that way.
  - dmitriid 9y ago
    > WARNING: This Standards-Track document is Experimental. Publication as an XMPP Extension Protocol does not imply approval of this proposal by the XMPP Standards Foundation. Implementation of the protocol described herein is encouraged in exploratory implementations, but production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft. Let me stress this: > production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft That's from XEP-0363: HTTP File Upload.
- emias 9y ago
  When incompatible changes are applied, the namespace used for feature negotiation is usually version-bumped, so implementations can choose to support and negotiate different versions of a given extension whenever that seems sensible. Not sure this works as well elsewhere (e.g. the Matrix spec just states that it's "still evolving: the APIs are not yet frozen and this document is in places a work in progress or stale").
  - dmitriid 9y ago
    XEP-0363: HTTP File Upload > WARNING: This Standards-Track document is Experimental. Publication as an XMPP Extension Protocol does not imply approval of this proposal by the XMPP Standards Foundation. Implementation of the protocol described herein is encouraged in exploratory implementations, but production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft. It means that there will be one client that supports this (Conversations for Android) and maybe one server supporting this (probably ejabberd). Good luck navigating the minefield :) Meanwhile I can install Slack on multiple devices and have the same functionality everywhere :)
madez 9y ago
Conversations is substantially inferior to WhatsApp. No encryption by default. No sent and read receipt by default. User account and password hazzle. No audio chat. No video chat. XMPP just doesn't cut it.
- SamWhited 9y ago
  None of these things have anything to do with XMPP (which supports all of them). I agree though, a more feature-rich client would be nice.
  - madez 9y ago
    Yes, they do have to do with XMPP. Conversations had for some time encryption enabled by default, but they needed to disable it again. I think XMPP is doomed, because it doesn't enforce the things I listed, and I think it will never do so.

by ge0rg 9y ago

dmitriid 9y ago

"Addressed" as in "most of the XEPs are marked as experimental and are subject to change".

ge0rg 9y ago
That might look a bit weird on the outside, but this is how protocol design works in the XSF. First you make a proposal (which is marked as Experimental), then you implement it and wait for other people to implement it as well, and then you look how well it works and whether it has rough edges that need fixing. If it is considered good, it moves on to Draft and then to Final [0]. This process could be faster for sure, but that requires independent developers to work on implementations and to share their experience. [0] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#approval-std
- detaro 9y ago
  Is there a set of mobile and desktop clients that support all these things you said were "addressed" properly? People always parade Conversations, but if I want phone-only I already have to many messengers. Because if have to look through tables and bug trackers to figure out what client/server combination I can use (and have to pester my friends to use(!)) you can't count something as "addressed" IMHO. I still use only a very basic set of features with XMPP, because in my experience attempts to get anything advanced are way to time-intensive to be worth it for the few buddies still on XMPP, and I can't really push new people onto it that way.
- dmitriid 9y ago
  > WARNING: This Standards-Track document is Experimental. Publication as an XMPP Extension Protocol does not imply approval of this proposal by the XMPP Standards Foundation. Implementation of the protocol described herein is encouraged in exploratory implementations, but production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft. Let me stress this: > production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft That's from XEP-0363: HTTP File Upload.
emias 9y ago
When incompatible changes are applied, the namespace used for feature negotiation is usually version-bumped, so implementations can choose to support and negotiate different versions of a given extension whenever that seems sensible. Not sure this works as well elsewhere (e.g. the Matrix spec just states that it's "still evolving: the APIs are not yet frozen and this document is in places a work in progress or stale").
- dmitriid 9y ago
  XEP-0363: HTTP File Upload > WARNING: This Standards-Track document is Experimental. Publication as an XMPP Extension Protocol does not imply approval of this proposal by the XMPP Standards Foundation. Implementation of the protocol described herein is encouraged in exploratory implementations, but production systems are advised to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to deploy implementations of this protocol before it advances to a status of Draft. It means that there will be one client that supports this (Conversations for Android) and maybe one server supporting this (probably ejabberd). Good luck navigating the minefield :) Meanwhile I can install Slack on multiple devices and have the same functionality everywhere :)

madez 9y ago

Conversations is substantially inferior to WhatsApp. No encryption by default. No sent and read receipt by default. User account and password hazzle. No audio chat. No video chat. XMPP just doesn't cut it.

SamWhited 9y ago
None of these things have anything to do with XMPP (which supports all of them). I agree though, a more feature-rich client would be nice.
- madez 9y ago
  Yes, they do have to do with XMPP. Conversations had for some time encryption enabled by default, but they needed to disable it again. I think XMPP is doomed, because it doesn't enforce the things I listed, and I think it will never do so.