[jitsi-users] Set a password to lock your room


#1

I installed jitsi meet using the quick route from
https://github.com/turint/jitsi-meet/blob/master/doc/quick-install.md

Ubuntu host is updated to current, latest nightly builds of the jitsi
suite.

Basic features seems to work, however when I try to set a password to
lock a room.
Lock failed
Failed to lock conference

Did I miss something in the configuration, not seeing any postings in
the forum?


#2

Hey devs,

yesterday I found the same issue and was thinking of applying the
following patch:
--- muc.js (revision 0b2a3e19e7adbf510a8704c286a4a366180cdfb4)
+++ muc.js (revision )
@@ -239,6 +239,8 @@
                     formsubmit.c('x', {xmlns: 'jabber:x:data', type:
'submit'});
                     formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'FORM_TYPE'}).c('value').t('http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig').up().up();
                     formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'muc#roomconfig_roomsecret'}).c('value').t(key).up().up();
+ // Fixes a bug in prosody 0.9.+
https://code.google.com/p/lxmppd/issues/detail?id=373
+ formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'muc#roomconfig_whois'}).c('value').t('anyone').up().up();
                     // FIXME: is muc#roomconfig_passwordprotectedroom required?
                     this.connection.sendIQ(formsubmit,
                         function (res) {

WDYT?
It seems a bug in 0.9.+ version, but it is fixed in their trunk
version. And lately and because of debian submission we changed the
package to depend on prosody or prosody-trunk.
https://code.google.com/p/lxmppd/issues/detail?id=373

Regards
damencho

···

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Grant Williamson <traxtopel@gmail.com> wrote:

I installed jitsi meet using the quick route from
https://github.com/turint/jitsi-meet/blob/master/doc/quick-install.md

Ubuntu host is updated to current, latest nightly builds of the jitsi
suite.

Basic features seems to work, however when I try to set a password to
lock a room.
Lock failed
Failed to lock conference

Did I miss something in the configuration, not seeing any postings in
the forum?

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users


#3

Hi Damian,

···

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Damian Minkov <damencho@jitsi.org> wrote:

Hey devs,

yesterday I found the same issue and was thinking of applying the
following patch:
--- muc.js (revision 0b2a3e19e7adbf510a8704c286a4a366180cdfb4)
+++ muc.js (revision )
@@ -239,6 +239,8 @@
                     formsubmit.c('x', {xmlns: 'jabber:x:data', type:
'submit'});
                     formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'FORM_TYPE'}).c('value').t('http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig').up().up();
                     formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'muc#roomconfig_roomsecret'}).c('value').t(key).up().up();
+ // Fixes a bug in prosody 0.9.+
https://code.google.com/p/lxmppd/issues/detail?id=373
+ formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
'muc#roomconfig_whois'}).c('value').t('anyone').up().up();
                     // FIXME: is muc#roomconfig_passwordprotectedroom required?
                     this.connection.sendIQ(formsubmit,
                         function (res) {

WDYT?

This will make the room non-anonymous which doesn't hurt here, because
the room is password protected anyway, so +1 from me.

Regards,
Pawel


#4

Does this problem also exist with prosody stable? We still have this other
bug with prosody where the MUC would not always forward all IQs, so it
might be better if we simply fixed our dependency.

--sent from my mobile

···

On 08 Oct 2014 8:24 AM, "Paweł Domas" <pawel.domas@jitsi.org> wrote:

Hi Damian,

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Damian Minkov <damencho@jitsi.org> wrote:
> Hey devs,
>
> yesterday I found the same issue and was thinking of applying the
> following patch:
> --- muc.js (revision 0b2a3e19e7adbf510a8704c286a4a366180cdfb4)
> +++ muc.js (revision )
> @@ -239,6 +239,8 @@
> formsubmit.c('x', {xmlns: 'jabber:x:data', type:
> 'submit'});
> formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
> 'FORM_TYPE'}).c('value').t('
http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig').up().up();
> formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
> 'muc#roomconfig_roomsecret'}).c('value').t(key).up().up();
> + // Fixes a bug in prosody 0.9.+
> https://code.google.com/p/lxmppd/issues/detail?id=373
> + formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
> 'muc#roomconfig_whois'}).c('value').t('anyone').up().up();
> // FIXME: is muc#roomconfig_passwordprotectedroom
required?
> this.connection.sendIQ(formsubmit,
> function (res) {
>
> WDYT?

This will make the room non-anonymous which doesn't hurt here, because
the room is password protected anyway, so +1 from me.

Regards,
Pawel

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev


#5

Hi,

This is a bug only with prosody stable. It is fixed in prosody-trunk.

Regards
damencho

···

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:

Does this problem also exist with prosody stable? We still have this other
bug with prosody where the MUC would not always forward all IQs, so it might
be better if we simply fixed our dependency.

--sent from my mobile

On 08 Oct 2014 8:24 AM, "Paweł Domas" <pawel.domas@jitsi.org> wrote:

Hi Damian,

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Damian Minkov <damencho@jitsi.org> wrote:
> Hey devs,
>
> yesterday I found the same issue and was thinking of applying the
> following patch:
> --- muc.js (revision 0b2a3e19e7adbf510a8704c286a4a366180cdfb4)
> +++ muc.js (revision )
> @@ -239,6 +239,8 @@
> formsubmit.c('x', {xmlns: 'jabber:x:data', type:
> 'submit'});
> formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
>
> 'FORM_TYPE'}).c('value').t('http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig').up().up();
> formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
> 'muc#roomconfig_roomsecret'}).c('value').t(key).up().up();
> + // Fixes a bug in prosody 0.9.+
> https://code.google.com/p/lxmppd/issues/detail?id=373
> + formsubmit.c('field', {'var':
> 'muc#roomconfig_whois'}).c('value').t('anyone').up().up();
> // FIXME: is muc#roomconfig_passwordprotectedroom
> required?
> this.connection.sendIQ(formsubmit,
> function (res) {
>
> WDYT?

This will make the room non-anonymous which doesn't hurt here, because
the room is password protected anyway, so +1 from me.

Regards,
Pawel

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev