User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae why aren't they options? You can write your own little core in C# with pgp/imap/smtp and do it yourself and have your own API forever if you really want
2
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae Because the only way to find out all the implementation decisions deltachat has made is to examine the code. They're "based on" the standards they list, not compliant with them. If I write a core just with those standards as written, It's not going to work correctly with the deltachat app.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae until it was disabled by default on relays relatively recently, plaintext emails completely worked. Group chats. Video/image attachments. There's nothing quite as special about it as you think. If the MIME header is in the encrypted part, it reads that one. If it's plaintext, it reads that one.
2
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae And when this changed, how were the authors of third party clients notified? Was there an open discussion period at a standards committee or a request for comment? No, because the assumption is that everyone should just use libdeltachat. That's not how open standards work.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae that wasn't a client change that was a server change and people who didn't want it didn't deploy that server change.

you can still right now connect DeltaChat to regular email servers and send messages around unencrypted. I wouldn't recommend it but you can do it.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae But my client connects to the servers. If they make a change it's going to just break my client without notice. That's a change that needs to be reflected by a new version of some standards document, somewhere.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae connects to which servers? if you choose to use someone else's server, yes, you get their limitations like how large of an attachment they'll allow.

nobody is forcing you to use any servers operated by DeltaChat or running the Chatmail configuration
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae And what if I send a message to another deltachat user on a different server from mine? How should that be handled? Will they refuse it if it's plaintext? What will I get in return, and how do I surface that to my user? I'm certain it's going to be different from how an email client would handle it. Either way, there's no, you know, standards document documenting these kind of implementation requirements for my third party client. And no infrastructure for warning me when they are about to change, so I can let my user's know we're only compliant with chatmail standard version 5, but an update to bring the new features and requirements of chatmail version 8 is coming soon.
2
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae
And what if I send a message to another deltachat user on a different server from mine? How should that be handled?
I don't know what you mean? It's just an email address, it gets sent by your email server like any other email.
Will they refuse it if it's plaintext?
They could, just like they can refuse a message with an attachment that's too big. But why are you trying so hard to send plaintext emails anyway?


Everything you've described today is like one-millionth as complicated as the mess you're dealing with in regards to multiple competing OMEMO standards and not knowing who has what, or trying to figure out which client has which XEPs
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae It's really not. To know what a server supports, you just ask it. And it will return the list of capabilities it has in a standard way. Same for other clients. Service and capability discovery are solved problems. Deltachat seems to just ignore them completely, because the expectation is that everyone should just use libdeltachat.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae you're talking about what a server supports, not what a client supports. How do you know if your friend's client can receive a call? That isn't communicated to your client in XMPP is it?
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae Yup, it sure does! XEP-0030 allows any client or server to be queried about exactly what features it does and does not support.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae but what if they didn't implement XEP-0030
2
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae Then they're not an XMPP compatible client, and servers should just drop them with an error.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae so there are non-optional XEPs that shouldn't be XEPs?
2
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae If you check the xmpp website, there are many xeps that are marked deprecated. And many others marked not yet widely supported. Developers should implement accordingly, with full transparency into what the standard is now, what it's going to be in the future, and what it was in the past. This is the only way you can get thousands of different people and organizations to build things that all interoperate.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae Note that this is exactly how the fediverse works. Start with Activity Pub, then consult the list of feps. Nobody gets to say "just use libfediverse". The code is not the standard. codeberg.org/fediverse/fep
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae every Fediverse server has to implement the Mastodon quirks or you can't federate with Mastodon. If you want to know what they are I can share some, but we're getting way off course here
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae Yes, and that was because of exactly the same stupid thing I'm complaining that deltachat does. We let mastodon define the standard in code, and now we're all stuck with its crap. Hopefully, in time, Mastodon will be small enough that it has to be a good fediverse citizen and not just do whatever the hell it wants. I run an iceshrimp.net instance myself, I know all about Mastodon's nonsense.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Only 3 Easy Payments of $19.95 @feld@friedcheese.us
1d
@fastfinge @jae if you knew it was all a lie, why did you use it as a shining example? It's a terrible example and no, sadly, nobody is going to dethrone Mastodon. This entire network will die before then.
1
0
0
0
User avatar
🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦 @fastfinge@interfree.ca
1d
@feld @jae I did not use it as an example. I used the fediverse, and the fep infrastructure, as an example. That's how things should work. The way both Mastodon and Deltachat do things are the anti-pattern here.
0
0
0
0