[standards-jig] JEPs and Jabber Adoption
justin-jdev at affinix.com
Sun Jun 29 23:01:45 UTC 2003
On Sunday 29 June 2003 02:23 pm, Paul Curtis wrote:
> Justin Karneges wrote:
> > True, there quite a few JEPs setting around and doing nothing. However,
> > what about the JEPs that aren't abandoned, but instead are endlessly
> > discussed? That's what this thread was originally about, anyway.
> Actually, the original thread was about getting a set of JEPs covering
> file transfer in place. My intention was not to start a far-reaching
> discussion of how JEPs are handled, but rather a wake up call on a
> single feature that is the single most requested item.
> I guess I need to be a bit more forceful .... we need to have file
> transfer in as many Jabber clients as quickly as possible. And they all
> need to use the same protocols to do it. To acheive that end, I made
> specific recommendations for the forwarding of four JEPs (one is already
> draft) to the Council for last call.
> The four JEPs (47, 65, 95, & 96) have all the functionality we need to
Fine, but at the same time, I could recommend JEPs 47, 65, 41, & 52. :)
JEP-0041 Reliable Entity Link
JEP-0052 File Transfer
So you've got your recommendation, and I've got mine. What do we do now? I
think there's a good reason this thread went into a debate about JEP
adoption, because it is the root of the whole issue.
More information about the Standards