[Members] XMPP validation service

bear bear42 at gmail.com
Sat Feb 12 15:56:35 CST 2011

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 08:52, Arc Riley <arcriley at gmail.com> wrote:
> This has been a need for some time now, its great to see some positive
> movement toward this.
> I think we should focus first on volunteer efforts.  I'd be happy to lay
> some ground work as far as tests for the core RFCs go, I've already written
> a few for my own use to test <stream> version handling, jid parsing (and
> rejection), verify stanza error detection and proper responses, etc for my
> own projects.  Its Python code (I don't know how people feel about that) and
> easily extendable.

A lot of us in the XSF grok Python so anything that tests would be

> GSoC is coming up.  Advertise now.  We're (Python Software Foundation, for
> which I'm the GSoC org admin) already working with students and getting the
> advertising going to get more psyched up.  Number of students depends
> greatly on how many applications you receive.  Breaking out validator tasks
> for multiple projects (each able to fill a Student's Summer) could get a lot
> of this done in a few months.

I'm the GSoC org admin for XSF and was going to bring up the exact
same issue next week at the XSF Board meeting :)

> I'd be afraid of paid work until a large amount is done already and a team
> of volunteers established.
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Steffen Larsen <zooldk at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Yeah that was exactly was I was talking about on the summit. A validator
>> on the web could be very nice for checking XMPP services (working like a
>> proxy, gathering/summarize info, errors etc.) for e.g. clients.
>> But as I was stating we also need a job (e.g. every time we commit an
>> example, xsd or a XEP) that checked if the given example is valid according
>> to the given XSD or that the XSD is just valid. I did this for a year ago
>> with our repository, but that was almost by hand using xmllint. I would help
>> off basic faults in the schema and the semantics in the examples.
>> Oohh by the way, I would gladly help out, even though I am currently
>> situated in the review group. :-)
>> -Ciao!
>> /Steffen
>> On Feb 11, 2011, at 11:14 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> > Folks, one of the topics we discussed at the XMPP Summit was the need
>> > for an XMPP validation service, similar to what the W3C provides at
>> > http://validator.w3.org/
>> >
>> > We've had discussions about this topic once in a while, but I think it
>> > is becoming increasingly important. I also think we might finally have
>> > critical mass in the community to:
>> >
>> > 1. Do the work (that's XSF members, and other developers in the
>> > community).
>> >
>> > 2. Fund the work (that's continuing sponsors, and companies who
>> > contribute into a pool of money that goes to fund development of
>> > validator support for particular XMPP extensions).
>> >
>> > Perhaps we can schedule a meeting in a few weeks to discuss this further
>> > and formulate a plan to make this happen?
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > --
>> > Peter Saint-Andre
>> > https://stpeter.im/
>> >
>> >
>> >


bear at xmpp.org (email)
bear42 at gmail.com (xmpp, email)
bear at code-bear.com (xmpp, email)
http://code-bear.com/bearlog (weblog)

PGP Fingerprint = 9996 719F 973D B11B E111  D770 9331 E822 40B3 CD29

More information about the Members mailing list