[Standards] Move Carbons to Last Call ("Proposed")

Steve Kille steve.kille at isode.com
Wed Aug 12 08:16:54 UTC 2015


Dave,

 

“it works for me”  seems a weak argument to progress.    

 

I agree that those arguing for a MAM subscriptions based approach need to put something concrete on the table.

 

I think that advocates of progressing 280 need to carefully address open issues (the list from Georg Lukas seems a good starting point), ideally within the XEP.

 

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

From: Standards [mailto:standards-bounces at xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Dave Cridland
Sent: 12 August 2015 08:55
To: XMPP Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] Move Carbons to Last Call ("Proposed")

 

 

 

On 12 August 2015 at 07:12, Steve Kille <steve.kille at isode.com> wrote:

Given that a MAM based approach may be the  preferred medium term approach, it seems to me that we should focus efforts to work out what the medium term approach is going to be.   If we end up deciding that a MAM based approach is preferred, it would be confusing to progress carbons as well.

 

To paraphrase Carl von Clausevitz, the enemy of a good XEP is the dream of a perfect one.

 

The fact is that neither the proponents of a solution based around MAM, nor those who insist there are serious flaws in Carbons as-is, have proposed anything concrete. The best proposal we have is a vague suggestion that we should do something with subscriptions to MAM which might provide multi-device capability.

 

Meanwhile, I can switch between desktop and mobile (and tablet) with comfortable ease, even halfway through a conversation, using the existing specifications, as provided by Openfire, using Gajim and Conversations as clients.

 

The above statement is absolutely crucial, since over the past few days the only consistent feedback from the Myths wiki page concerning a concrete missing feature in XMPP has been exactly this. We've had people even on this very list insist that this is a critical use-case unmet by Carbons - but I can assure you it works very well for me.

 

There is no other proposal on the table.

 

I'm backing the one we have.

 

Dave.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20150812/470ba760/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list