bot doesn't recognize MUC owners #19
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
I can start a session if I'm admin, but not if I'm owner of the MUC
Also notice how it repeats the message 3 times, plus the last one.
Now this popped out:
Was the bot an "owner" or an "admin" in the group chat?
If the bot was an "admin" and you were an "owner", were you present in the group chat when you have contacted with the bot?
If the bot is an "admin", it will not be able to recognize any "owner" that is not present oin the group chat, because it requires to read the group chat settings, and as an "admin" the bot can not see any JID of any "owner" from settings.
I suppose, that, in this situation:
Questions
I am owner and bot is admin, but I was always online (and in group chat) when doing such tests.
Same for the messages it sent to me. I was in the group chat.
I just tried again, after fixing the bot's alias by removing the bookmark, and I got the same exact result.
If I am owner I cannot establish a session, with the messages posted earlier.
The other account of mine, which is admin, receives this:
An unauthorized attempt to establish a session for groupchat status@chat.woodpeckersnest.space has been made by roughnecks@woodpeckersnest.space
When an "owner" is present in group chat, then the bot should see the "owner" by reading the group chat roster.
Please. Keep the state of things as they are; you and I will examine it.
Similar issues in a groupchat at xmpp-it.net
I, as owner, was able to start a session
A friend who I made admin, tried and I got this message from the bot:
An unauthorized attempt to establish a session for groupchat lozibaldone@conference.xmpp-it.net has been made by lozibaldone@conference.xmpp-it.net
Instead of the person's jid I got the name of the group..
Asked if he was whispering to the bot instead of a proper 1:1 chat, they said "no".