Time  Nick           Message
00:15 ungali         is there an active #minetest there?
00:15 MTDiscord      <entuland> there is
00:16 ungali         might as well take the jump now
00:16 cheapie        ungali: There is, yes.
00:16 ungali         it
00:17 ungali         s a shame though
00:17 MTDiscord      <entuland> the cycle of things ?
00:45 MTDiscord      <Jonathon> shame libera doesnt bridge to matrix (that i know of)
03:02 specing        Would be nice if we also lost the discord bridge in the process
03:10 Kimapr2        why? is the discord bridge bad?
03:11 cheapie        specing: I mean... it doesn't seem to be there yet, so there's still hope :P
03:11 MTDiscord      <Kimapr> the discord bridge is here
03:15 specing        Discord is a proprietary chat network, so it would be hilarious if Minetest were to keep bridging to it after migrating to libera chat because freenode became proprietary
03:17 specing        And, it is also funny that all these projects (Minetest included?) that depend on GitHub, a proprietary closed-source social coding network, are migrating to libera chat
03:17 specing        My face is red from all the facepalming
03:20 epoch          where the like button in this IRC thing?
03:20 MTDiscord      <Warr1024> Apparently freenode became "proprietary" back in 2017 and people just managed to keep it subtle up until lately.
03:28 Quiark         specing: now consider all those cryptocurrency projects that have big mouths about "decentralisation" and then use Medium, Telegram and/or Discord
03:31 specing        yes, hypocrisy all around
03:31 specing        Minetest is not free software
03:31 specing        Minetest is free software in license only.
03:31 specing        the spirit is dead
03:31 specing        if there ever was a spirit, but probably not.
03:50 Quiark         I don't blame people for not having time to work for free on something
04:24 MTDiscord      <Jordach> Quiark: >not mentioniung signal
04:24 Quiark         No signal never claimed anything about decentralisation
04:25 Quiark         But a lot of people are projecting that on them as if it was the solution to all problems.
04:26 MTDiscord      <Jordach> shitpost: use iMessage for minetest communications
04:27 MTDiscord      <Jordach> call me a madman but the FSF should've foresaw freenode getting rekt years ago
04:53 sofar          FSF isn't relevant for freenode
04:54 sofar          and FSF is irrelevant nowadays almost anyway as well
05:25 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> re: Discord bridge: 99% chance of staying
05:35 MTDiscord      <Benrob0329> It's funny seeing people any non-Discord platform complain about Discord, and people on Discord complain about literally any other platform. Funny how people forget that it's ok to have different priorities than each other.
05:35 MTDiscord      <Benrob0329> *people on
05:42 MTDiscord      <Benrob0329> Personally, I want to move because I like the (previous) Freenode staff and feel that they will have the community's best interests in mind long-term.
09:43 justcommenting > Would be nice if we also lost the discord bridge in the process
09:43 justcommenting we should actually add more bridge to more platform instead of losing any of existing bridge
09:43 justcommenting people should be allowed to use whatever platform they like and still be able to participate in the discussion
09:43 justcommenting being all-elite and insisting on just one platform is not healthy at all, that's called 'segregration'
09:43 justcommenting not everyone would want to install IRC client just for one specific project when they already have other platform installed for all other projects
16:31 * twoelk       is somehow reminded of the childrensbook hero Noddy
19:52 Zander_200     hi
21:05 benrob0329     test
21:06 BrBridge       success!
21:06 BrBridge       failure!
21:06 BrBridge       well, one of the two
21:06 BrBridge       No nicks, I'd think that would be a default settings but I suppose not
21:13 BrBridge       13<b​enrob0329>Test
21:13 benrob0329     Test2
21:13 BrBridge       13<b​enrob0329>I forgot the space, but at least it works
21:20 benrob0329     Is Libera giving anyone else trouble at the moment?
21:21 rubenwardy     no?
21:21 benrob0329     hmm
21:21 benrob0329     Maybe the server near me is just having issues, or it's my network
21:25 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> test
21:25 benrob0329     There we go
21:27 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Discord bridge ignores it (as expected, both should send notices) but I can always add the Discord to this bridge is GreenXenith wants it all to be homogeneous
21:27 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> *if
21:28 rubenwardy     what is that?
21:28 benrob0329     Bridge to Libera, was suggested and approved by C55
21:29 benrob0329     (only approved by, was not suggested by C55)
21:30 benrob0329     https://irc.minetest.net/minetest-hub/2021-05-20#i_5821807
21:31 benrob0329     I haven't added -hub yet because I want to make sure this is working properly before tying it to an account and dealing with autovoice
21:33 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> oh, I thought it was for Discord, so it's bridging to the-other-place-that-shalt-not-be-mentioned? eheheh
21:34 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> For now, yes. I may add other official spaces to it as well in the near future but for now this is fine
21:34 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> cool
21:40 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> benrob0329: The Discord bridge doesnt ignore it, its just not bridged here yet
21:41 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> It's also down atm, dunno if that's intentional or not
21:41 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> It is not intentional, no..
21:42 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Will the bridge you have work the same as the current bridge?
21:43 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> As in send messages to Discord via Webhooks? Yes.
21:43 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> its an intense of https://github.com/42wim/matterbridge
21:43 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Can it send to the 3 channels already?
21:44 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I don't have -hub added yet because I don't want to deal with autovoice right this sec, but yes
21:44 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I don't have staff anywhere on IRC anymore so I can't do that without someone like VE lending a hand
21:47 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> a
21:47 GreenXenith    b
21:47 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> c
21:47 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Fair enough
21:47 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> We can adjust it later, I dont have time or energy to work with this right now
21:48 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> It works and that's all that matters
21:51 MTDiscord      <entuland> noice
21:54 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> wow that was quite a delay ahahah
21:54 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> 2 minutes flat :P
21:54 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> aaaand we'll get people calling other people BrBridge in addition to MTDiscord :P
21:54 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Now what happened
21:54 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Is it just me or are both bridges choking
21:55 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> your messages went through instant to Discord on my end
21:55 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Yeah, after a while
21:55 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> and mine as well just went through immediate now
21:55 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I think Libera is choking a bit
21:55 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Cant imagine why :)
21:55 MTDiscord      <entuland> yeah eheheh
21:55 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Definitely not because of the sudden rush of new people
21:55 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> maybe it was just a temp hiccup, now it's quick both ways
21:56 BrBridge       05<G​reenXenith> Oh man I only just now noticed the <BrBridge> <MTDiscord> <entuland>  this is getting out of hand, now there are 3 of them :D
21:56 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> :P
21:56 BrBridge       10<V​anessaE> [05-20 17:56] <GreenXenith> Oh man I only just now noticed the <BrBridge> <MTDiscord> <entuland>  this is getting out of hand, now there are 3 of them :D
21:56 BrBridge       10<V​anessaE> now there are 6 ;)
21:57 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> yikes x)
21:57 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Apparently there's a draft IRCv3 RELAYMSG spec for spoofing nicks, dunno if Libera or Freenode supports it though
21:57 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> the discord one used to rename itself to match the sender on the other side
21:57 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> I guess that's not feasible here on IRC
21:57 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> It still does
21:57 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> You just have to be speaking from Freenode for it to do so atm
21:58 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> on Discord all the messages are sent as BrBridge on my end
21:58 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> ah sorry, I missed that bit
21:58 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> Because BrBridge is the one bridging from Libera to Freenode
21:59 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> so anythingon Libera shows up on Freenode from BrBridge so MTDiscord displays it from BrBridge :]
21:59 MTDiscord      <GreenXenith> Dont worry its totally not confusing at all
21:59 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> eheheh
21:59 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> well, as lont as it doesn't loop it's already great :P
21:59 BrBridge       10<e​ntuland> s/lont/long
22:01 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Could be worse, I could be bridging joins/parts too :P
22:02 BrBridge       14<S​oni> there's a CTCP for spoofing nicks
22:02 BrBridge       14<S​oni> (please don't use it)
22:04 MTDiscord      <VanessaE> do like kaeza's hexchat script does for Minetest IRC bots:  <botname> <username>  blahblahblah  gets shortened to username@bot_abbreviation blahblah
22:04 BrBridge       14<S​oni> https://github.com/SoniEx2/CTCP-S/blob/master/ctcp-s.md#forward
22:04 BrBridge       14<S​oni> (please don't use it. altho if you do, put it at the end of the message instead of the start.)
22:04 MTDiscord      <VanessaE> er shortened to <username@bot_abbreviation> blahblah
22:05 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I'm hoping for either the RELAYMSG draft or the Display Name draft to become standard
22:05 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> client-only tags > CTCP
22:06 BrBridge       14<S​oni> benrob0329: CTCP > waiting decades for server-side support
22:06 MTDiscord      <VanessaE> for example, <KAYLRP@VEBL> How are you?    is how that person's chat looks coming from my Banananananananaland server
22:06 BrBridge       14<S​oni> (also do either of those half-assed specs actually support nested bridges?)
22:08 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I mean, IRCv3 has gotten decent support for universally helpful things like SASLv3 and Capability Negotiation
22:09 BrBridge       14<S​oni> yeah but it never goes far enough
22:09 BrBridge       14<S​oni> there's no IRCv3 server-specific emoji for example
22:09 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I'd assume that a good bridge would see the intended nick and use that, so theoretically yes they'd support nested bridges
22:10 BrBridge       14<S​oni> no that's bad
22:10 BrBridge       14<S​oni> it should relay the whole chain
22:11 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Also, you're quick to call a draft spec you know nothing about half-assed and start complaining about the progress of something which has helped the state of things and is continuing to make progress
22:12 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I'd rather see IRCv3 fix the basics and make the spec consistent than do what Matrix did and focus on anything but
22:13 BrBridge       14<S​oni> they keep ignoring real-life use-cases because those don't fit neatly in their model, rather than trying to make space for them
22:14 BrBridge       14<S​oni> and there's also the whole "let's just keep sending passwords in plaintext to the server so the server can freely log it, and deprecate everything else while at it" issue
22:18 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> What, and what? First, no, that's a generalization (and a poor one at that). Second, sure, but SASL supports other auth mechanisms nowadays too
22:19 BrBridge       14<S​oni> (paraphrasing your own messages) "the draft spec doesn't contain provisions for relaying the whole relay chain with the message"
22:19 BrBridge       08<l​uk3yx> There is a channel for IRCv3 discussion, if you had any ideas maybe that'd be the place to send them?
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> this is bizarre
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> with the two bridges
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> <benrob0329> I'd rather see IRCv3 fix the basics and make the spec consistent than do what Matrix did and focus on anything but
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> lol
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> matrix is hilarious
22:20 BrBridge       07<e​rlehmann> matrix has these examples in the spec … that do not match the spec
22:21 BrBridge       14<S​oni> also: if the "other auth mechanisms" are only EXTERNAL... ugh
22:21 BrBridge       14<S​oni> (altho TLS-SRP with EXTERNAL wouldn't be half bad. but that's beside the point.)
22:22 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Send your ideas to #ircv3 then :P
22:24 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> But I don't think it's unreasonable to not directly support bridge-chaining, since bridge-chaining is a bit PITA and it's better to support most use cases sanely than every use case insanely. Anyways, I'mma drop this before the channel is completely flooded with offtopic chit-chat
22:28 BrBridge       14<S​oni> "just use a stack .-."
22:38 BrBridge       10<V​anessaE> benrob0329:  "flooded with offtopic chit-chat"  oh, like there's anything else going on in here? :P
22:38 BrBridge       14<S​oni> anyway sure, if we can get unbanned from IRCv3 we'll propose RFC 7628 support :3
22:39 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Actually yeah, Oauth for IRC SASL sounds nice
22:41 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> VanessaE: That's a good point, I suppose there isn't any on-topic discussion going on right now
22:42 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> Also unrelated but kinda related, apparently doing a ctl-z followed by running `bg` lets you move a process to the background in bash
22:42 BrBridge       14<S​oni> yeah ctrl-z is awesome
22:43 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> I knew it was a thing but wasn't sure of the specifics and didn't want to inadvertently kill the bridge
22:45 BrBridge       02<L​one_Wolf> equivalent of `command & disown` but during runtime?
22:47 BrBridge       10<V​anessaE> I usually nohup command &
22:48 BrBridge       07<b​enrob0329> VE: Well yes, but I didn't for testing initially and don't really care about logs in this case