@tdemin that is exactly the problem I mentioned yesterday. Communities of old solutions ignore improvements from modern alternatives and fall into stagnation. Xabber web's dev calls e2ee madness, ejabberd's dev calls it a cancer with misunderstanding even how e2ee works. And with all that fans calls XMPP secure.
I wonder that there is a web client for XMPP at all.
OTOH, I'm not surprised that a developer who personally doesn't want or need to use OMEMO is tired of some OMEMO fans who keep demanding that they implement it.
@tdemin politely opened a feature request, everything was fine, but then people started "me-too"-ing without contributing anything to the issue.
In the last comment, Xabber devs said that:
> We don't outright deny the need for encryption, we will do this in time, when we won't have more important things for us on our roadmapz
And I think this is totally reasonable.
And if I wanted to have OMEMO support in Xabber quicker than that, I'd try to implement it myself and submit a pull request.
Well, the first comment you quoted wasn't confrontational, but I still think it doesn't contribute much to the issue.
And the developer overreacted, sure. But if what they say is true, they get a lot of such messages over all the different communication channels, and are probably tired of it, which I can understand.
I'm not saying it's tigre-bleu (the first commenter)'s fault. Tbh, I think joe-average-user's comment was when it all went wrong.
Still, I think it's important to keep in mind that the developers are just people, who also have limited time and patience, and we shouldn't keep bothering them just because they haven't yet implemented a feature we need.
I think all the "everyone, comment on this issue so that the devs get it implemented" approach is very ineffective and harmful for both sides. At least in case of small open-source projects which don't really benefit from having a lot of users.
>Ah, that's the reason why nobody I ever heard of uses this.
And yeah, I know it was after the dev overreacted.
Not saying the dev's overreaction was good, but I can understand them. They're probably tired of people constantly asking for the same feature w/o contributing anything.
See also other replies of mine in this thread.
BTW, MUC-OMEMO is coming to Converse.js in the next release (soon) and there's a good chance that support for XEP-0374 OX will also be added this year.