Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 18 Jun 2015 19:21, "Curtis King" wrote: > > >> On Jun 18, 2015, at 8:45 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >> >> On 18 Jun 2015 15:40, "Curtis King" wrote: >> > >> > >> >> On Jun 18, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >> >> >> There's consensus, I would argue, given that it's extremely well

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

> On Jun 18, 2015, at 8:45 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > > On 18 Jun 2015 15:40, "Curtis King" mailto:ck...@mumbo.ca>> > wrote: > > > > > >> On Jun 18, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Dave Cridland >> > wrote: > >> > >> There's consensus, I would argue, given that it's extremely we

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 18 Jun 2015 15:40, "Curtis King" wrote: > > >> On Jun 18, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >> There's consensus, I would argue, given that it's extremely well supported in servers, desktop and mobile clients. In fact, finding servers that didn't support it a year ago is hard. > > > Tw

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

> On Jun 18, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > There's consensus, I would argue, given that it's extremely well supported in > servers, desktop and mobile clients. In fact, finding servers that didn't > support it a year ago is hard. Two servers and maybe 5 clients does not make for

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 18 Jun 2015 15:01, "Kurt Zeilenga" wrote: > > What’s the bar for “core”? I would think it at least mature Draft standard if not Full standard. > > I don’t think it’s appropriate to add Carbons to core when it seems that there’s not consensus that it’s the best solution for any problem the majo

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote: > I don’t think it’s appropriate to add Carbons to core when it seems that > there’s not consensus that it’s the best solution for any problem the > majority of XMPP IM/MUC deployments are facing. I'm not entirely sure that experimental XEPs

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

What’s the bar for “core”? I would think it at least mature Draft standard if not Full standard. I don’t think it’s appropriate to add Carbons to core when it seems that there’s not consensus that it’s the best solution for any problem the majority of XMPP IM/MUC deployments are facing. — Kur

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

actually works pretty well. I know there's potential theoretical holes, but i suspect those are more plugged than not with 198 and MAM. >> > > So, the quality standard we are aiming for is pretty well, with the holes > plugged by other XEPs :-) Perfect being the enemy of pretty well, to p

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

> On Jun 17, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > You can't. You would need to add in a bunch of stuff. I was hoping for more details than “stuff" :-) To me there has been large amount of hand waving in this area and I like to avoid adding protocol extensions which become abandoned. So

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 6/17/15 3:47 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: On 17 June 2015 at 22:41, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet mailto:pe...@andyet.net>> wrote: On 6/17/15 3:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: I meant to say that Carbons wasn't even on there before, whereas it's now pretty much essential.

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 17 Jun 2015 22:56, "Curtis King" wrote: > > >> On Jun 17, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >> Two years ago I agreed with you entirely. I maintained this position until I switched to a server and set of clients that supported it, and then found it actually works pretty well. I know th

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

> On Jun 17, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > Two years ago I agreed with you entirely. I maintained this position until I > switched to a server and set of clients that supported it, and then found it > actually works pretty well. I know there's potential theoretical holes, but i >

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 17 June 2015 at 22:41, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet wrote: > On 6/17/15 3:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: > >> I meant to say that Carbons wasn't even on there before, whereas it's >> now pretty much essential. >> > > Agreed with respect to the technology. With respect to the process, the > Carbons XE

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 6/17/15 3:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: On 17 June 2015 at 20:52, Curtis King mailto:ck...@mumbo.ca>> wrote: > On Jun 17, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Dave Cridland mailto:d...@cridland.net>> wrote: > > Folks, > > Many moons past, before the dawn of a couple of years ago, we had thi

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 17 June 2015 at 20:52, Curtis King wrote: > > > On Jun 17, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > > > Folks, > > > > Many moons past, before the dawn of a couple of years ago, we had things > like XEP-0302, which declared that - excitingly - advanced servers might > want to implement PEP.

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On 17 June 2015 at 20:08, Sam Whited wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > I think that these days, any server should be doing PEP. I suspect we're > > nearing the point where we need to consider Carbons as a "Core", rather > than > > "Advanced". > > I agree, but be

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

> On Jun 17, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > Folks, > > Many moons past, before the dawn of a couple of years ago, we had things like > XEP-0302, which declared that - excitingly - advanced servers might want to > implement PEP. > > I think that these days, any server should be do

Re: [Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > I think that these days, any server should be doing PEP. I suspect we're > nearing the point where we need to consider Carbons as a "Core", rather than > "Advanced". I agree, but before the XSF recommends Carbons as a core feature they shou

[Standards] {Core|Advanced} {Client|Server} 2015

Folks, Many moons past, before the dawn of a couple of years ago, we had things like XEP-0302, which declared that - excitingly - advanced servers might want to implement PEP. I think that these days, any server should be doing PEP. I suspect we're nearing the point where we need to consider Carb