[Standards-JIG] roster synchronization

Tijl Houtbeckers thoutbeckers at splendo.com
Wed Sep 15 21:01:30 UTC 2004


On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:38:17 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org>  
wrote:

> The consensus from this morning's Jabber Council meeting [1] is that we
> are not comfortable with the presence-based solution described in the
> Roster Subscription Synchronization proposal [2], and that we would
> prefer to move forward with a solution based on JEP-0093 [3] or, more
> likely, a revised version of JEP-0093 (which we would publish as a
> separate, standards track JEP to supersede JEP-0093). We would also
> prefer to find a solution that will address both roster synchronization
> with gateways and the desire for "shared groups" as described in
> JEP-0140 [4]. Obviously, integrating this with JEP-0100 [5] for gateways
> would also be required. Since I am author of JEP-0093, JEP-0100, and
> JEP-0140, I have volunteered to write a suggested solution here (i.e.,
> the replacement for JEP-0093, the modifications to JEP-0100, and a
> replacement for or serious modification of JEP-0140).
>

Well, it looks like we'll finally have something of a counter-proposal  
then! I've mentioned superseding JEP-0093 to cover both Shared Groups and  
Roster Synchronization as an alternative route before so that's no  
surprise. A seperate standards-track JEP (which I asume will not use the  
jabber:x:roster namespace) will also take care of my concern that this  
will break existing JEP-0093 implementations. I'll see how the rest of  
this proposal stacks up against roster-subsync.



More information about the Standards mailing list