[Standards] Re: Simple Jingle example(s) and spec(s) wanted
gnauck at ag-software.de
Thu Feb 8 14:06:45 UTC 2007
Remko Tronçon wrote:
> Well, for C++ projects, there will be libjingle (if all goes as
> promised), which is pretty modular and has no dependencies (except for
> expat, but you can avoid this as well by plugging in your own parser).
> There has also been work on a Java Jingle framework IIRC. The black
> boxes won't be a problem i think.
i agree that libjingle works great for C++. For other developers with
C++ experience it should also be no problem to create libjingle bindings
for other languages. But there are lot's of programmers which don't have
enough c/c++ experience to create this bindings.
> Personally, I'm more interested in implementing it myself :-)
> I think that, with proper
> documentation and a way to bootstrap signaling code, Jingle should be
> 'easy to implement'.
this depends again on your programming language, and if you rely on
existing code for all the Jingle dependencies or implement everything on
your own. I think other projects already died because it's not that easy
All this Jingle stuff is great, but it depends on so many other
protocols with are not XMPP related. We leave the XMPP area here, and
stumble into the P2P, voice and video world. libjingle is more than only
a XMPP library, it's also a great P2P and voice library.
More information about the Standards