[Tools-discuss] matrix tests

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 11 December 2020 20:52 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44ECF3A0ED6 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:52:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0RkIKw1ztWGO for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:52:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A8F93A0A9C for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:52:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6A0BE2C for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:52:44 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GYCFullp3TtG for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:52:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.244.2.119] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE8FCBE20 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:52:42 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1607719963; bh=AbOz37m7ovTl0qpOl42tvJGz5PCkNuYXPGOY7LS9bxA=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=zG2ubvnCedWPPRE010De8J4HfKbg453XzkeR1ChdO5ZIRXvqpZsnMDnNd0qhCbS3H oOkQ5xNc5vpJCQhJzqnQeo2zgGLJHoVEoHsrku2WyxtQsRhc33rYcgrghSxSL6XSFZ 6OG8hAWzp9z9dhEs0+I/MSxNE0DavEsESywQ0A5A=
To: tools-discuss@ietf.org
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <e547d7be-8838-ce7f-fad5-61af474f7d12@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:52:41 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VRraKZSNSVfds6jWFjVb148LFetUuv14W"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/ADkfhDxhdErqsJPO7Z1pnAgZzyY>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] matrix tests
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:52:49 -0000

Hiya,

I've used jabber at IETFs for ages. I don't find that at
all hard. (But my jabber accounts while old, seem to be
working fine.)

I've run my own matrix server for the last few years for
non-IETF purposes.

I appreciate the ability to use matrix as mobile clients
for matrix are more widely available and more up to date
than for jabber. That (better clients) might be more
noticeably beneficial when we get back to f2f meetings,
as in WFM-mode, I have plenty of screen real-estate.

For IEF109 I connected to the IETF rooms using my normal
matrix account from my own server. It's very good that
can be done.

I had expected there to be a matrix room corresponding
to each jabber room but I didn't investigate much due
to the TZ issues and the fact that jabber was fine.

It didn't occur to me to create any matrix rooms. If
it had, I'm not sure if that'd have been useful but
I can imagine it being so in future, e.g. for a bar
bof. Before that'd be a standard procedure I'd like
to understand the duration for which any such rooms
might last, how closed/open they may be etc.

I think the main feature in matrix clients that I like
that beats jabber is the ability to edit messages after
they've been sent. I'm not sure how that'd pan out with
the jabber logs, but am happy to do a test if that's
useful. I'm also happy to connect and play about in
general if that's helpful, just ping me.

Whatever experiments are done, I think an equivalent
to the jabber logs will be needed if matrix or another
scheme is to be used for more than experiments.

Cheers,
S.