| 20 Jun 2018 |
 ajberchek | Begins banging on a tin can | 18:27:20 |
| ajberchek | Would this be a good topic for the upcoming matrix hackathon? | 18:27:42 |
| ajberchek | Discussion point: Would more people want to contribute discussion or code wise, if I hashed out a more detailed roadmap and created issues on github for the features needing to be implemented still? | 18:28:45 |
 anoa | Yes, most definitely. | 18:36:26 |
| anoa | Also matrix sprint is currently going on, though pretty sure e2ee stuff was already covered today. | 18:36:45 |
| ajberchek | Great, I'll get going on the creation of the roadmap and hopefully have it finished up sometime this week. | 18:38:37 |
| ajberchek | It will mainly include the migration from c++ Olm to c Olm, utilizing the key query, key claim, and key sync endpoints, beginning sessions, and crypto ops for sessions. | 18:39:54 |
| ajberchek | Is there anything huge I am missing from that list? | 18:40:18 |
| ajberchek | Oh, neat, what came of the discussion? Any writeups available online yet? | 18:40:40 |
| * anoa doesn't quite remember the e2ee doc, so not sure | 18:41:26 |
| anoa | And I wasn't part of the convo on that one, but I'll expect something will come out of it soon if anything did come up. I imagine it was likely for cross-signing and other nice e2ee features. | 18:42:21 |
 @cadair:cadair.com |
Would this be a good topic for the upcoming matrix hackathon?
The upcoming what now?! | 23:20:43 |
| @cadair:cadair.com | A matrix hackathon sounds like great fun | 23:21:13 |
| 21 Jun 2018 |
| anoa | There's currently no such thing planned, but I agree that that would be quite awesome to host one. | 07:40:09 |
| ajberchek | @anoa, Okay, I'll check it out then and see what needs to be added in. Okay, I'll keep an eye out for that as well. | 18:31:27 |
| ajberchek | @Cadair oops, sorry about that, I guess I got the sprint mixed up with a hackathon lol. It would be really cool to have a matrix hackathon though. Are remote hackathons a thing, so people dont have to fly to the same geographical location? | 18:34:31 |
| 23 Jun 2018 |
| ajberchek | Should the client or the wrapper be the one to handle m.room.encryption state event? I feel like it should be the client since that message won't be encrypted AFAIK. Additionally, there will already be code to handle rooms in that client code, and if this responsibility were pushed down to the wrapper, then room state knowledge would need to be added. | 19:35:47 |
| ajberchek | Opinions? | 19:35:50 |
 Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #8: Initialize New Session from content in m.room_key event [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/8 | 19:42:17 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #9: Download Device List for Users In the Room [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/9 | 19:44:54 |
| ajberchek | I suppose there will need to be another callback provided by the client if the wrapper is to not handle the room events. Otherwise the client would need to be aware of when the wrapper is creating a new session and would need to be able to retrieve the necessary information to package into an event to send to that user they are starting the session with. | 19:49:36 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #10: Create functionality to start an Olm session [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/10 | 19:50:39 |
| ajberchek | Perhaps a better option would be to provide another wrapper function called to initialize a session, and that would return the pertinent event contents for the client to send to the room? | 19:54:17 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #11: Start a Megolm session [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/11 | 19:54:28 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #12: Implement the decryptAndVerify function [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/12 | 19:57:46 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #13: Implement the signAndEncrypt Function [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/13 | 19:59:21 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #14: Add Automation Tooling to this Repo [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/14 | 20:02:54 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #15: Migrate existing C++ Olm library calls to C Olm library calls [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/15 | 20:04:22 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek closed issue #5: Sign Identity Key and Add Signature During Upload [closed] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/5 | 20:08:51 |
| Github [@aberchek:matrix.org] (deprecated) | [ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp] ajberchek opened issue #16: Add CMake Files to Automatically Install Dependencies [open] - https://github.com/ajberchek/matrix-olm-cpp/issues/16 | 20:25:51 |
