[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP Compliance Suites 2016

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Fri May 13 16:10:09 UTC 2016

On 13 May 2016, at 17:05, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> There's a problem inherent in this that we'd need to actually verify the clients have actually implemented the features they claim, and that in turn means some volunteer effort in testing them though. I believe that any effort we put into this would be repaid hugely, though.

Or, instead of volunteers, projects pay to be certified. (Yes, I realise that’s not likely to be a popular suggestion).

I’d be slightly concerned that if it’s volunteer based it needs to be unbiased - e.g. we couldn’t have some unpopular client sitting in a queue because the volunteers don’t want to do that one.


More information about the Standards mailing list