Sorry for the brevity of my previous reply. I was traveling.
I think the spec, as it stands, is a great start and more than enough to
start coding from. But I think the handling of OTR overtures is poorly
designed. I am talking about two components of the spec:
1) The AutoStart and AutoAccept
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 00:50, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
On 06/04/2011 07:36 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
When writing down the whole API I've realized that in progress
should actually be broke down into tree states: REQUEST_SENT,
REQUEST_RECEIVED, and AKE_STARTED.
Thanks for you clarifications! I will try to write a more in-depth reply
later, but here are a few quick thoughts in case you're mulling over the
spec as we speak.
On 06/09/2011 06:18 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 00:50, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
On
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 19:42, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
Thanks for you clarifications! I will try to write a more in-depth reply
later, but here are a few quick thoughts in case you're mulling over the
spec as we speak.
On 06/09/2011 06:18 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
On 06/04/2011 07:36 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
When writing down the whole API I've realized that in progress
should actually be broke down into tree states: REQUEST_SENT,
REQUEST_RECEIVED, and AKE_STARTED.
After finding my way through telepathy-spec XML syntax, I've managed
to write
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 13:12, Will Thompson
will.thomp...@collabora.co.uk wrote:
On 03/06/11 04:04, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
I haven't thought that the UI could handle it entirely, it would be
pretty straightforward since it would need the code to trigger an
accept anyway. But wouldn't be
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 01:10, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
To reply to a question from earlier in the thread:
On 06/01/2011 01:04 AM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
Yes, I think so. Essentially shared secret and question/answer is
exactly the same thing, but on the latter there
Hello Danni, thanks for the info! Comments inline.
2011/6/3 Danielle Madeley danielle.made...@collabora.co.uk:
On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 00:04 -0300, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
You want the channel to be created immediately, without waiting for
network traffic, I think. This means the Empathy
I think we're at the point where it would be helpful to put forward a
proposal for the final spec. Joao, are you planning to do that?
A few replies in line:
On 06/03/2011 07:23 AM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 01:10, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
To reply
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 10:55, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
I think we're at the point where it would be helpful to put forward a
proposal for the final spec. Joao, are you planning to do that?
Yes, I'm planning to do so most likely tonight (UTC-3) or tomorrow the latest.
A
On 03/06/11 04:04, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
I haven't thought that the UI could handle it entirely, it would be
pretty straightforward since it would need the code to trigger an
accept anyway. But wouldn't be easier to automatically test
(continuous integration) this feature in the CMs
On 01/06/11 06:04, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 01:20, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
On 05/29/2011 06:56 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
The problem is that Channels only exists for already established
conversations. The client needs a way to get/set the
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 14:58, Will Thompson
will.thomp...@collabora.co.uk wrote:
On 01/06/11 06:04, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 01:20, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
On 05/29/2011 06:56 PM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
The problem is that Channels only
To reply to a question from earlier in the thread:
On 06/01/2011 01:04 AM, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
Yes, I think so. Essentially shared secret and question/answer is
exactly the same thing, but on the latter there is a hint on which
shared secret should be used for verification. This makes
On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 00:04 -0300, João Paulo Rechi Vita wrote:
You want the channel to be created immediately, without waiting for
network traffic, I think. This means the Empathy chat window can show
the user what's going on, as in a throbbing padlock or something while
the OTR session
Hello all,
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 01:20, Christian Anderson christ...@avtok.com wrote:
Thanks for your thoughtful replies. Comments inline.
By the way, should we be continuing this discussion on the mailing list?
Or did you intentionally take it offline? I can forward this same
message to
On 22/05/11 04:47, wolfrage8...@gmail.com wrote:
João,
This looks good, thank you for the information and update. Now I am
not very strong as far as GIT goes, so what would be the best way for
me to incorporate your changes in my gitourious repository. Just apply
the raw patch? Then i think
Thanks for working on this! I'm just an Empathy user who would like e2e
encryption, not an expert on anything. But I want to follow up on what
Will said and throw some ideas out there that might have already been
discussed out of band.
On 05/25/2011 02:24 PM, Will Thompson wrote:
I'm inclined to
João,
This looks good, thank you for the information and update. Now I am
not very strong as far as GIT goes, so what would be the best way for
me to incorporate your changes in my gitourious repository. Just apply
the raw patch? Then i think we still need some one to review the spec
work to get
19 matches
Mail list logo
