[Members] Google and XMPP federation

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Mon May 27 09:11:26 UTC 2013


On 26 May 2013 20:07, "Simon Tennant" <simon at buddycloud.com> wrote:
> My point is it's easy to get all fired up about Google dropping XMPP. But
we don't do ourselves any favours by suggesting Google release a hobbled
version of hangouts because a spec dictates.

No, nor me. But given the only aspects not known to work right now are
multiparty file sharing and voip, and the latter especially is not not hard
to fix, I don't understand why they wanted to throw away everything, and
understand even less why they're making "statements which lack technical
justification" - my latest euphemism.

> I'm not convinced by rebuttals. It puts the XSF on the back foot and
we're playing catch up. And besides, nobody except us really cares for spec
details.
>
> Far better for us to come out with an "open hangouts" spec that shows
this can be done with XMPP rather than rebutting individual statements.
We're never going to win that game.
>

Yes and no. If we get into a tit for tat rebuttal, it'll be hard. That
becomes a he says, she says argument and Google have lots of PR folks. But
we can be honest and technical, keep a single rebuttal stating both the
cases where Google's statements are wrong, and where we need to do more
work.

> This was my thinking on the topic and how we could enable hangout-like
features within buddycloud:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/buddycloud-dev/jehtPgsCurQ/cDzWDfsvw_wJ(it's
a long read and buddycloud specific)
>
> I'd be happy to put some time towards a more general XSF proposal for
"open hangouts" driven by requirements of:
>
> - group communication
> - reliable message delivery
> - mobile friendly
> - message history
>
> Google building hangouts outside of XMPP shows that there is a need for
group communication that just works.
>

Right, but buddycloud elected to go a current path some time ago,
sacrificing backwards compatibility and interoperability to build something
new.

Nevertheless, I think we can get all of those using existing
specifications. You'd need a nice client to do it, of course, and a server
that did things "right", but it'll work. Multiparty fileshare and A/V are
actual problems that we don't yet have a solution for, but a solution isn't
obviously beyond XMPP.

> Now our job is to build great specs, that serve real needs. Not
complaining when people don't use them.
>

Right. The XSF can't complain just because people don't use our specs. We
can complain, though, when they misrepresent them, and we can also make
comments in favour of interoperability, using Google's actions as an
illustration of what not to do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20130527/bafd93a8/attachment.html>


More information about the Members mailing list