[jadmin] Advertising xmpp

[Sander Devrieze]

2008/1/5, Samuel Penn <sam at glendale.org.uk>:
> It's not just one list that needs to be maintained though - it's many.
> When a version of a jabber client is packaged, the developers need to
> ensure that the list they use is uptodate. A mature client may be
> stable for a while, and get chosen for inclusion in an OS distribution,
> which possibly means that the list actually used by users may be a
> year or two out of date.

The list is fetched from the Net by the client so it will be always
the latest version. In Coccinella it works like this:
1) user starts Coccinella
2) setup assistant is started
3) setup assistant fetches the list from the jabber.org server
4) users sees the list

I guess this is also the way how it works in Kopete.

> That's assuming the developers remembered to
> grab the latest version of the list before building a release of their
> client.

No maintenance is required by the client devels.

> The obvious solution is to have a dynamic list stored on a server, which
> a client can request, with a smaller backup list built into the client
> in case the server is not available. This requires getting agreement
> from client developers to make use of the list however.

If Coccinella can't retrieve the list it will just not show the list
(I guess). The user will still be able to manually enter a server of
course. It could be a good idea to make backup links for this list.
@stpeter: how often is the list updated?

> > >   * It may be confusing as to what the differences are between
> > >     the servers, when really there isn't any.
> >
> > How can this be confusing and how can this confusion be fixed?
>
> If I'm presented with a list of a 1000 servers (say) to choose from,
> I'd want to have some idea as to how to make a choice. I'd like
> information on which are the most reliable and support the most
> services. However, if I know nothing about XMPP, then I may not
> even be aware that some servers might support more facilities than
> others. An uninformed decision isn't really providing any benefit
> to the user.

In most cases you can use the facilities of other servers.

<snip>
> If servers can dynamically report that they are lightly loaded and
> would be happy to have lots more users, list them as recommended.
> Spreading the load across lots of servers would be an advantage,
> but the user would have to be guided towards lightly loaded servers
> for this to work.

Yes, it would be nice if a server can automatically report it does not
accept more users any more so that this server (temporary) can be
removed from the list.

<snip>

> > Not true, there were similar issues with email: there also were walled
> > gardens for electronic mail.
>
> Okay. I've never encountered any, though I didn't start using the
> internet and email until 1991.

http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2007/05/facebook_myspac.html

-- 
Mvg, Sander Devrieze.