On Thursday 11 February 2010 19:53:10 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 1/30/10 9:22 AM, Tomasz Sterna wrote: > > Dnia 2010-01-29, pią o godzinie 07:52 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre pisze: > >> You mean http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/private-muc.html I suppose. > >> It's not clear to me if we absolutely need multi-resource support in > >> order to have private MUCs. And I wouldn't want to have a dependency > >> on the server to provide private MUCs anyway. > > > > One may always establish multiple connections to bring up more > > resources. > > But I think resource binding is way simpler method. > > > > BTW: What was the exact reasons for dropping it? > > I didn't find it nor confusing, nor hard to implement. > > That's helpful feedback. > > > Pros: > > - does not add another flow, just reuse existing one > > - easy to implement (servers already support one resource bind and > > multiple connections from one client) > > - very straightforward once you get what resource bind is > > (and you need to bind one) > > > > Cons: > > - ?? > > - Changing the existing flows for resource binding > - Managing multiple resources on the client side > - Knowing when the session is really finished > > I'm sure were other reasons but I'd need to re-read the list archives to > remember them.
Also, the feature seemed to come out of left field. Maybe I missed the discussion, but to me it felt like this feature was just a case of "Why Not?" rather than being born from real necessity. That doesn't make it a bad thing, but I want to remind that we should be conservative about our changes to the core specs. -Justin _______________________________________________ JDev mailing list Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20 Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
