[Standards] Jingle "implementability"

[Greg Hudson]

On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:53 -0800, Robert Quattlebaum wrote:

> What if these plug-ins are actually separate processes? Imagine if you
> were using some sort of XMPP client daemon, for example. In such a
> setup, you would have separate processes for file transfer,
> audio/video chat, roster, etc. With how Jingle is currently specified,
> only one process would be allowed to do Jingle stuff at a time. So you
> could video chat, but not while being able to do file transfers. You
> could use file transfer, but not be able to do video chat.

The Jingle process could itself have plugins (subprocesses again) to
handle a/v or file transfer or whatever.

Presumably this subprocess plugin architecture does not use blocking
RPC.  If it does, you have bigger problems; for instance, you can't do
two file transfers at once.