Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 12:35:42PM -0700, David Waite wrote: > I'm not sure, but I thought priority ties were decided by whichever > changed presence last. It's the most recent connection, as it's based on how the sessions are managed (stored) for an active user. They're stored in a pushdown stack, most recent on top (first), and the algorithm [1] that determines the primary session for a user, for example, is written such that the most recent session (i.e. connection) will win, as it gets retrieved first and none of the other (older) sessions will beat it if they all have the same prio. [1] see js_session_primary() cheerio for now dj ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
Another problem with having it implemented server-side is transportation: when you leave for work, you're not there yet. Any messages sent during that time would go to your home account (because that account had the most recent activity), and you'd never find out about those messages until you got back home from work (and if you're very unlucky, the guy who tried contacting you on your way to work will try again on your way back from work). Clearly, this is a client-side problem, and asking the server to solve it wouldn't be too wise. Asking the server to help out (maybe supporting an "I'm now here!" message, or something like that) may be interesting, though. Dave Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Peter Millard wrote: > > Derek - > > This could be implemented client side by having the client's auto-away > settings automatically goto '0' priority, and when you have activity, the > client kicks back to the "normal" priority for that client (say 1 or 2). > This would be a lot harder to implement server side I think. > > Peter M. > > - Original Message - > From: "Derek J. Balling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:36 AM > Subject: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions > > > > OK, let me see if I understand something properly: > > > > 1.) If user@server/Home sends a message to "someone else", that > > someone else should reply to, obviously, user@server/Home, since > > that's where it knows user IS, correct? > > > > 2.) The Jabber book, on p.127, says: > > > > "In the event there's a priority tie, the most recent connection to > > the Jabber server wins" > > > > By connection, do we mean "Session start" or "activity seen"? The > > reason I ask is that we have a lot of employees with dedicated access > > at home, and it would make sense that folks would just leave their > > Jabber client running at home and running at work. Now, to make sure > > they always get their messages, they can either: > > > > (a) constantly twiddle the priorities to be "higher than the other place" > > (b) leave them at the same priority, but every time they > > (go-home|get-to-work) sign out and sign back in > > > > but a nicer alternative would be: > > > > (c) have the server know "ah, Home and Work have the same priority, > > but I last saw ACTIVITY from Work, so they must be there." (or vice > > versa) > > > > Is "C" do-able? > > > > D > > > > -- > > +-+-+ > > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | > > | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | > > | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | > > | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | > > +-+-+ > > ___ > > jdev mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > > > > ___ > jdev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
> Can you suggest any clients that DO this, though? ;-) Neither Winjab > nor JIM do it in their present releases. RhymBox does it. Have a look: http://www.rhymbox.com It lacks a few other features but it does the status/priority trick ... The way it does it is: chat -> 10 available -> 8 dnd -> 6 away -> 4 xaway -> 2 (invisible/privacy mode should be 0 I think, but RhymBox doesn't support it (yet)) - Sebastiaan ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
I'm not sure, but I thought priority ties were decided by whichever changed presence last. -David Waite Derek J. Balling wrote: > OK, let me see if I understand something properly: > > 1.) If user@server/Home sends a message to "someone else", that > someone else should reply to, obviously, user@server/Home, since > that's where it knows user IS, correct? > > 2.) The Jabber book, on p.127, says: > > "In the event there's a priority tie, the most recent connection to > the Jabber server wins" > > By connection, do we mean "Session start" or "activity seen"? The > reason I ask is that we have a lot of employees with dedicated access > at home, and it would make sense that folks would just leave their > Jabber client running at home and running at work. Now, to make sure > they always get their messages, they can either: > > (a) constantly twiddle the priorities to be "higher than the other place" > (b) leave them at the same priority, but every time they > (go-home|get-to-work) sign out and sign back in > > but a nicer alternative would be: > > (c) have the server know "ah, Home and Work have the same priority, > but I last saw ACTIVITY from Work, so they must be there." (or vice > versa) > > Is "C" do-able? > > D > ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
At 10:49 AM -0700 2/27/02, Peter Millard wrote: >This could be implemented client side by having the client's auto-away >settings automatically goto '0' priority, and when you have activity, the >client kicks back to the "normal" priority for that client (say 1 or 2). >This would be a lot harder to implement server side I think. That would certainly work. Can you suggest any clients that DO this, though? ;-) Neither Winjab nor JIM do it in their present releases. Unfortunately, I'm not a great DEVELOPER so much as I am a user looking for a solution (although I'm enough of a developer, on other platforms, that I could probably help beta-test relevant solutions if they presented themselves) D -- +-+-+ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | +-+-+ ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
Re: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
Derek - This could be implemented client side by having the client's auto-away settings automatically goto '0' priority, and when you have activity, the client kicks back to the "normal" priority for that client (say 1 or 2). This would be a lot harder to implement server side I think. Peter M. - Original Message - From: "Derek J. Balling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:36 AM Subject: [JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions > OK, let me see if I understand something properly: > > 1.) If user@server/Home sends a message to "someone else", that > someone else should reply to, obviously, user@server/Home, since > that's where it knows user IS, correct? > > 2.) The Jabber book, on p.127, says: > > "In the event there's a priority tie, the most recent connection to > the Jabber server wins" > > By connection, do we mean "Session start" or "activity seen"? The > reason I ask is that we have a lot of employees with dedicated access > at home, and it would make sense that folks would just leave their > Jabber client running at home and running at work. Now, to make sure > they always get their messages, they can either: > > (a) constantly twiddle the priorities to be "higher than the other place" > (b) leave them at the same priority, but every time they > (go-home|get-to-work) sign out and sign back in > > but a nicer alternative would be: > > (c) have the server know "ah, Home and Work have the same priority, > but I last saw ACTIVITY from Work, so they must be there." (or vice > versa) > > Is "C" do-able? > > D > > -- > +-+-+ > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | > | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | > | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | > | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | > +-+-+ > ___ > jdev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
[JDEV] Resources and Priorities Questions
OK, let me see if I understand something properly: 1.) If user@server/Home sends a message to "someone else", that someone else should reply to, obviously, user@server/Home, since that's where it knows user IS, correct? 2.) The Jabber book, on p.127, says: "In the event there's a priority tie, the most recent connection to the Jabber server wins" By connection, do we mean "Session start" or "activity seen"? The reason I ask is that we have a lot of employees with dedicated access at home, and it would make sense that folks would just leave their Jabber client running at home and running at work. Now, to make sure they always get their messages, they can either: (a) constantly twiddle the priorities to be "higher than the other place" (b) leave them at the same priority, but every time they (go-home|get-to-work) sign out and sign back in but a nicer alternative would be: (c) have the server know "ah, Home and Work have the same priority, but I last saw ACTIVITY from Work, so they must be there." (or vice versa) Is "C" do-able? D -- +-+-+ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | +-+-+ ___ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
