5 Jun
2024
5 Jun
'24
6:50 a.m.
On Tue, 04 Jun 2024 17:29:00 +0200
Marvin W <xmpp(a)larma.de> wrote:
Hi Goffi,
Thanks for your message.
I know I'm not particularly good with words and my language sometimes
tends to be perceived as aggressive or exclusive. I did not intend to
attack or insult anyone and I apologize if I did.
On Tue, 2024-06-04 at 14:52 +0200, Goffi wrote:
As a person who is using OMEMO that is still the case. Nothing has
changed. I get OMEMO encryption problems regularly to the point that i
am using it only if:
- The person I am talking to has only one device
- Owns/will own the device for a long time and the key will remain
static
- Is 1:1 conversation
Everything else is doomed to fail and get the XMPP is bad reaction.
MSavoritias
PS. I am NOT saying this to get responses of "File bug reports" or
"Work together to improve things", for multiple reasons. One of them
being that in general the community seems to have given up on making
OMEMO work.
Though I usually appreciate your feedback, I find
this particular
comment
especially pedantic and patronizing. You are aware that you say
people who
implemented OMEMO, for instance, were irresponsible and should be
"educated",
right?
The people that *first* implemented and deployed OMEMO to a large
number of end-users of the public XMPP network, before making a
reasonable effort to stabilize the specification and to actually get
the implementation itself to a stable state were in my opinion acting
too careless.
It's not always black and white, and to some degree the fault was and
is often the XSF here, which is what this discussion was meant to be
about: To adjust our XSF procedures to better reflect the need of the
community.
OMEMO was a mess, I think we all remember the days when half the
messages on half of the devices would show up as "Message is OMEMO
encrypted", even if their client was supposedly supporting some kind
of OMEMO. Developers of clients were put on a public blame list for
not implementing OMEMO fast enough. The reference for how things
needed to work was not a specification, but a single implementation.
And OMEMO still is a mess, next to nobody is implementing the latest
revision, even though we know there are ways to upgrade that do not
break anything. And those few that only implement the latest revision
are totally screwed because their client is incompatible with what all
others do, so they can't even do a lot of testing and are considered
incompatible to OMEMO, even if technically it's everyone else that's
incompatible.
I sure hope we learn from this, "educate" ourselves and try to make
sure it won't happen like that again.
Marvin
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org