[Standards] Which server do you prefer mostly ?

Matthew Wild mwild1 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 24 18:16:00 UTC 2014

On 24 September 2014 16:38, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter at andyet.net> wrote:
> On 9/24/14, 9:34 AM, Hund, Johannes wrote:
>> Wow, finally some more „exotic” M2M use cases. Sounds interesting your
>> project!
>> In terms of message load I could think tigase might be also be worth a
>> look – it has downsides on configurability and extensibility from what
>> I’ve heard though.
>> I see that certain pattern, and maybe it would be good to have a Matrix
>> of the brokers with some infos like scalability in terms of user count ,
>> scalability in terms of message load on the other column, clustering,
>> ease of configuration, code base maturity, etc.
>> Or maybe just extend the present on xmpp.org in terms of ‘”primary
>> design goals”.
>> Would you think that to be senseful or just me asking for a  flamewar?
> Mostly just asking for a flamewar. It is difficult to sort truth from fancy
> (or marketing claims). It is also difficult to find people who will keep the
> information objective and up to date.

Agreed. For example, there is already such a matrix on Wikipedia. It's
certainly based more on marketing claims than the truth. As a result I
stay well away from it (which means Prosody often looks worse than it
is compared to the other implementations, but... principles!).

To maintain an accurate and objective matrix I think the best solution
would involve automated testing (which is also liable to be incorrect
of course, but it could be improved over time - and generally bugs
would affect all server implentations equally). Such an effort would
not be a trivial undertaking, and I don't think it would be worth it.


More information about the Standards mailing list