[Standards] MAM

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Fri Feb 10 22:06:48 UTC 2012

On 2/10/12 2:59 PM, Matthew Wild wrote:
> On 10 February 2012 21:09, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
>> On 2/10/12 12:01 PM, Kim Alvefur wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 15:09 +0700, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
>>>> On 01/12/2012 01:41 AM, Kim Alvefur wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 17:33 +0700, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
>>>>>>> Matt Wild's upcoming archiving spec is a good candidate for this.
>>>>>>> /K
>>>>>> Where I can take a look on it?
>>>>> Here: http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/message-archive-management.html
>>>> I've read the spec and I really like it, thank you for your work! My
>>>> wishes to it:
>>>> 1) Some way to retrieve a number of messages which will be retrieved
>>>> with a query. May be useful when synchronize a large archive to show,
>>>> for example, a progress of the process.
>>> I think this is covered by Result Set Management integration, if the
>>> implementation supports that in combination with MAM.
>> Matthew, may the XEP Editor consider MAM contributed to the XSF inbox,
>> or would you like to make further changes before the XMPP Council
>> considers it for acceptance as a XEP?
> I really would like to make further changes, the version I uploaded is
> very much a work in progress 'preview' that is not ready for
> implementation yet in my opinion. I understand the purpose of
> 'experimental' status, but I would rather get things mostly right on
> the first attempt than submit a protoXEP that I have substantial
> protocol changes queued for.
> That said, you can consider even what is there a contribution to the
> community, and if people really think it's worthy of submission in its
> current state then I won't hold it back. I suggest giving it a week...
> if I haven't officially submitted it by then, let's move forward with
> the current draft.
> The summit highlighted the widespread interest in this spec to me, so
> I really shall try my best to get it cleaned up and submitted in the
> coming days.

Fair enough, thanks!


Peter Saint-Andre

More information about the Standards mailing list