| 18 Jul 2025 |
 emily | that seems like a terrible flaw | 17:01:57 |
| emily | I guess if upgrades can override it that's not the end of the world | 17:02:10 |
 Cat | The community theory is that its a fix for that State Res fixes in v12 are not perfect. | 17:02:26 |
| emily | could room creators "undo a tombstone" in that case? | 17:02:29 |
| Cat | as in the state res fixes in v12 likely can fail and reset anyways so they made the room creators have infinite power so they can fix the state back to proper. | 17:03:17 |
| emily | ...so this means that after all that talk about whether Matrix's sacrifices to have rooms not controlled by one homeserver are worth it, now rooms are going to be controlled by one nameserver | 17:03:22 |
| Cat | They are still going to have decentralised control its just a set of master servers can overrule it. | 17:03:53 |
| Cat | as you can define additional creators. | 17:03:59 |
| Cat | we dont know all the details as its still under security embargo. | 17:04:20 |
| Cat | We dont actually know. | 17:04:36 |
| Cat | Manual ones can definetively still do that. | 17:04:57 |
| Cat | Even tho they are being silly attempting to fuck with room upgrades even more due to that the new room ID format will break the Synapse chicken and Egg dance of creating the room ID for the next itteration of the room before the create event it self so that the create event can refer to the tombstone that points to the new room. | 17:05:45 |
| Cat | That stupidly complex dance i just described is just bullshit that Synapse does that is not needed. | 17:06:20 |
| emily | it seems worrying if a room creator can go inactive and then go nuts or get compromised years later and potentially stop even the room getting replaced | 17:07:47 |
| emily | I guess you just really want a designated admin account for every room at this point | 17:08:01 |
 f0x | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
could room creators "undo a tombstone" in that case? couldn't you always just redact/sorta ignore a tombstone event? | 17:12:06 |
| emily | yeah that's what I fear | 17:13:02 |
| emily | so you really need to tombstone a room in advance of your BDFL going rogue | 17:13:21 |
| emily | so that it's irrelevant by the time it happens | 17:13:34 |
 Charles | In reply to @f0x:pixie.town
couldn't you always just redact/sorta ignore a tombstone event? Hmm I don't think redactions will render a tombstone ineffectual, it will only redact semantically ignorable fields | 17:16:35 |
| Charles | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
...so this means that after all that talk about whether Matrix's sacrifices to have rooms not controlled by one homeserver are worth it, now rooms are going to be controlled by one nameserver Bingo | 17:16:52 |
 [0x4A6F] | Yeah, we might just create new rooms with the admin (Moderation Team) account and migrate from tombstone rooms, when draupnir supports that new room version. | 17:16:51 |
| Cat | Draupnir will most likely support it in time. | 17:19:25 |
| f0x | ah right, so you'd have to really mess with the room state to override it (and that's still ineffectual for everyone that's already followed the upgrade) | 17:19:42 |
| Cat | We got a 3 week extension and Gnuxie is gone for 2 of them on vaccation but even before the vaccation prelim v12 support was added. | 17:19:44 |
| emily | In reply to @f0x:pixie.town
ah right, so you'd have to really mess with the room state to override it (and that's still ineffectual for everyone that's already followed the upgrade) yeah my fear is people not thinking about their absentee founder as a threat at all and then disaster. but tbf I guess you have to proactively defend against that to some extent in current Matrix too | 17:20:32 |
| Charles | In reply to @cat:feline.support
Even tho they are being silly attempting to fuck with room upgrades even more due to that the new room ID format will break the Synapse chicken and Egg dance of creating the room ID for the next itteration of the room before the create event it self so that the create event can refer to the tombstone that points to the new room. Yeah IMO they need to drop this change, many good reasons to keep it, no good reasons to drop it | 17:20:41 |
| Cat | And as long as Gnuxie signs off on it i can merge changes into the project and i think cut releases even (I have the right to github wise i just dont know the pipeline) so like Draupnir is in good hands. | 17:20:44 |
| emily | In reply to @charles:computer.surgery
Bingo I think this chat protocol could be improved somewhat. | 17:21:03 |
| Charles | I personally am interested in other protocols at this point | 17:21:28 |
