[CCing the list again...]

segler_alex wrote:
> hmmm, but this sounds not very user friendly to configure.
> is this possible from an "Client.Observer" point of view?

That's another way to do it. You could also do it by making the CMs
smart enough to recognize that OTR is going on, and indicate this
somehow on the Messages interface. Or, you could make the CMs do all the
OTR for you, with API that could work for OTR or XTLS, whichever is
available.

We discussed this briefly on #telepathy; I attach the log.

-- 
Will
 danni | wjt: instead of writing a proxy CM
 danni | could you abuse observers ?
   wjt | well... maybe.
   wjt | the problem is for channel requests:
   wjt | » address book requests a channel
   wjt | » magic OTR observer steals it
   wjt | » address book is told the request succeeded
   wjt | » new OTR proxy channel pops up
   wjt | » gets dispatched normally
   wjt | If the text handler supports AddRequest, it'll get the first request, 
and then it'll go away, and then it'll get a channel
   wjt | it could probably work...
sjoerd | and your logger will log both bullshit and otr messages ;)
 danni | your channel is plugged into the observer, and which then creates a 
new channel itself
   wjt | sjoerd: this would be a reason for tiered observers
 danni | wjt: maybe the CD needs an extra class? Modulators
sjoerd | wjt: that doesn't really solve it as the logger should be the lowest 
tier
 danni | which can futz with channel contents
   wjt | right
 danni | of course, at this point you pass the bong along
 danni | because once people have a modulator plugged in that's modulating 
_all_ text channels indiscriminately
 danni | we'll run into the world of MY TELEPATHY DOESN'T WORK WITH YOURS
 danni | (OMG THIS SOFTWARE IS SHIT)
         ! sjoerd doesn't think the solution in this case should be, add even 
more moving parts ;)
 danni | all because they install telepathy-otr-plugin, which has installed 
some crack into the CD
 danni | sjoerd: I agree, more spec seems wrong
 danni | I guess I was just wondering about abusing existing spec, for evil
   wjt | well, we'll need *some* extra spec for XTLS
sjoerd | i'm still somewhat convince you could do otr mostly outside of cms 
insid the cm by using the messages interface
sjoerd | but yeah, the encrypted channel spec should be good enough to cope 
with both something like otr and xtls
 danni | could you do OTR as a mime type within the messages spec?
sjoerd | danni: that's what i'm suggesting indeed
   wjt | right, you could make an OTR message type, and then your UI would deal 
with it
 danni | application/octet+ssl+html
   wjt | yes, this means Empathy, Kopete, and your other favourite text UI 
would have to grow OTR support
   wjt | but you're going to need *some* UI for it
 danni | yeah, it's not very Telepathy-esque
 danni | to require this support in the apps though
sjoerd | hence the second suggestion to at least keep otr in mind when we 
design the encrypted channels spec
sjoerd | on xmpp, i'd really prefer us using xtls as that gives us much more 
flexibility
 danni | also because it's not nutty?
sjoerd | other cms (say butterfly) could do otr instead assuming MSN doesn't 
have a proper e2e encryption mechanism
 danni | who seriously uses MSN between two users who have a client supporting 
OTR ?
   wjt | lots and LOTS of people
   wjt | Everyone who uses Adium on the Mac
sjoerd | danni: people using adium or pidgin or whatever, but use msn as their 
main protocol
 istaz | sjoerd: wouldn't you need some UI anyway to configure the OIM stuff? 
(encryption keys?)
sjoerd | istaz: we need that both for xtls and otr

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
telepathy mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy

Reply via email to