14:12 <mathju> spacekookie: thanks! it looks good!

14:13 <mathju> I had some thoughts about the Chat protocol:

14:13 <mathju> Why do we use the creation time and a roundtrip when we have colliding new rooms?

14:13 <mathju> I think in DTN's with a delayed delivery of maybe days this would cost a lot of time ...

14:13 <mathju> Why not automatically accepting and mergin due to the room ID? We wouldn't need the round-trip then.

14:14 <mathju> Chat Room struct:

14:14 <mathju> ----------

14:14 <mathju> * the handling in the GUI will be different: automated naming and icons of 1to1 rooms)

14:14 <mathju> * I think we should also have an icon possibility for the group

14:14 <mathju> * How about a flag or an enum wether this is a 1-to-1 communication or a real group.

14:14 <mathju> --------

14:14 <mathju> * I think the word 'receivers' would maybe be more understandable than 'friends'?

14:14 <mathju> Chat Message

17:31 <spacekookie> mathju: I think it would be important to avoid having duplicate groups with people which requires some sort of synchronisation between devices

17:31 <spacekookie> Especially because initial messages might take days. I think going for "eventual consistency" is a better approach than just hoping for the best

18:42 <mathju> My idea is that only one room per 1to1 communication exists, if two exist both devices will automatically decide for the same valid room due to an algorithm (e.g. the higher id). They can still communicate their decision to the other device, but we would not miss or delay any message.

20:06 <spacekookie> Oh I forgot you wanted to just check which ID was "bigger"

20:06 <spacekookie> Yea okay I guess we can do that