[Standards] Syncing legacy contact list
Guus der Kinderen
guus.der.kinderen at gmail.com
Tue Jun 8 20:21:47 UTC 2010
On 8 June 2010 17:19, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> On 6/6/10 2:22 PM, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
> > I would like to see the current XEPs
> > being fixed/improved in a way that doesn't require structural changes. I
> > think the suggestions made by both Brian and myself will make the
> > existing XEPs "work" as intended, without changing them in a structural
> > way. Low-hanging fruits? Can we simple pick one (or another alternative
> > to the same extend), incorporate that as a guideline in the existing
> > XEPs, and continue work on the sub-roster idea in a parallel effort?
> Patches are always welcome, although I agree with others in this thread
> that work on distributed rosters would be more productive in the long term.
I agree - the distributed roster specification should be the long(er)-term
goal. Applying such a construct would potentially fix problems that appear
practically unsolvable using the current XEP definition - at least not
without major rewrites of the XEP (XMPP roster changes when the gateway is
temporarily unavailable, for example).
I propose to patch the Gateway-interaction XEP in such a way that it
outlines the importance of gateway-sided caching of the legacy roster
representation. Although obvious for some, others will have trouble seeing
its importance at all, or will fail to see that this is a pragmatic way of
avoiding the problems identified in my first message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards