[OTR-dev] OTR version 4 Draft #2

[Jurre van Bergen]

On 05/08/2018 03:15 PM, Ian Goldberg wrote:
> <snip>
>>> * Last I've seen, it wasn't explicitly stated whether or not OTRv2 is to
>>> be dropped. In the implementation I should be able to preserve support
>>> for OTRv2, but is this desirable? (I know the modes imply OTRv3 and/or
>>> 4, still ...)
>> I think once OTRv4 is out of the door, just like OTRv1, OTRv2 should be
>> dropped. @ian? @nik?
> I'm in principle fine with dropping v2 support.  I wouldn't mind a quick
> look-around at what OTR implementations still don't support v3, though.
> pidgin-otr does, of course.  What about Adium?  Others?

As per the excellent list made by the otrv4 team:

https://github.com/otrv4/otrv4/wiki/Client-OTR-implementation-overview

The only implementation not fully otrv3 would be Potr, that target weechat-otr and Gajim.

The problem with Adium, it's badly maintained, it's missing SMP and their Trac
SSL certificate has been expired and when you click through the error you get a python stack trace.

I really wish Adium was better maintained but at this point, I think people should use Coy.im (for
various reasons) over Adium. Which includes an otrv3 implementation in Golang.

I think it's more or less safe to say we can drop otrv2.

I'll look with koolfy into Potr.

Best,
Jurre