Michael Brown wrote:Maybe I am - and Rachel can correct me if that is the case - but in theOf course the JSF can never point out an 'official client', not as long as they don't create a client themselfs. But IMO if they would do that it would harm their position IMO. It would also make Jabber less open.
context of her previous posts I understand that she was advocating a portal
site run by the general Jabber community (maybe called jabber.net) that
would choose one client above all other clients as some sort of "Official"
client for Jabber. This is what I am strongly opposed to.
Yup, in my original post ages ago (last friday?) I think it opposes the goal of the JSF being a neutral standards body. But I think it benefits the Jabber community as a whole to have such a portal. IMO, the goal of such an effort would be building market share for Jabber users; grow the Jabber network. Some official place that, if you want to have someone experience 'jabber' and is a non-technical end user, you can point them, and they'll have a pleasant experience. e.g. go to jabber.net and it will tell you how to get online and chatting with Jabber. The user should be able to write down 'jabber.net' on a napkin go home, type it into their browser, and get online.
The main point in this 'discussion' is the fact that rachel said 'official client' (mind the quotes!!) while (IMO) she meant; recommended client. IMO the JSF or jabber.net or jabbercentral.com could recommend some client for particular user groups (people that need perfect interoperation with legacy systems, Mac users, Windows users, people that want the bleeding edge).
For this effort, I think there needs to be a clear path. You may be able to (in fine print) show there are alternatives, but the main path for 99.9% of the users should be to get them, with a minimum number of clicks, choices, and reading, to a downloaded client and online and chatting. choice is bad for this program because choice requires knowledge which is going to be more text, or other things that slows them down in getting online.
Of course, anyone can setup such a portal/service. The 'official'-ness of this particular one is jabber.org should point newbies to it, and marketing and such will use it as the portal to send people when they want to 'try out Jabber'.
Anyway. IMO it would be nice if we could take a step back before we are going to attack eachother on semantics.. What do we want, where do we want it and who is going to create/maintain it? And what does the JSF think of this? And eeeh, why is this discussion taking place on jdev? :D IMO the marketing-jig is more appropriate..
Why we want it: to increase jabber usage (grow the jabber network)
Who should create/maintain it: a new, separate organization bootstrapped by the JSF. this jabber.net org should take over the Jabber community maintenance aspects of the current JSF. I don't think it can be JSF because who would want to sponsor it if it's using their competitor's client/server... :) The name 'JSF' should be transferred to a new org dedicated to Jabber open source software development and taking over those JSF resources currently related to it (jabber studio, jdev@, etc). And the existing pure standards group should be renamed 'XMPP standards group' or something... sorry I digress. :)
What does the JSF think about it: well, this particular member thinks it's a great idea... perhaps essential
Why on jdev: I have no idea. I actually think it belongs in members@ and crossposted there but it never transferred
-iain
_______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
