On 13 October 2013 16:46, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name wrote:
On Oct 11, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Matthew Wild mwi...@gmail.com wrote:
Our server implementation (courtesy of Marco Cirillo aka Maranda) is also
working well in production environment, with more than 300 unique users
On Oct 13, 2013, at 5:55 PM, Matthew Wild mwi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 October 2013 16:46, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name
wrote:
On Oct 11, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Matthew Wild mwi...@gmail.com wrote:
Our server implementation (courtesy of Marco Cirillo aka Maranda) is also
On Oct 10, 2013, at 3:27 PM, Matthew Wild mwi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Valérian,
On 10 October 2013 05:56, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name
wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm re-escalating my request for XEP-0313 update, which purpose is to bring
a way to change the user's message
On 11 October 2013 11:28, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name wrote:
Our server implementation (courtesy of Marco Cirillo aka Maranda) is also
working well in production environment, with more than 300 unique users
simultaneously using the module (and much more over a larger timespan).
On Oct 11, 2013, at 12:28 PM, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name
wrote:
Also, would be nice if someone could code an ejabberd and an Openfire
implementation, this would really push clients forward to implementing it
quickly.
There is a pull request from Michael Uvarov
Hi Michał,
On 11 October 2013 12:17, Michał Piotrowski
michal.piotrow...@erlang-solutions.com wrote:
On Oct 11, 2013, at 12:28 PM, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name
wrote:
Also, would be nice if someone could code an ejabberd and an Openfire
implementation, this would really push
On 11.10.2013 20:28, Valérian Saliou wrote:
Also, would be nice if someone could code an ejabberd and an Openfire
implementation, this would really push clients forward to implementing
it quickly.
There is an implementation in commercial version of ejabberd. I wrote
it, the issues with the
Hi Valérian,
On 10 October 2013 05:56, Valérian Saliou valer...@valeriansaliou.name wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm re-escalating my request for XEP-0313 update, which purpose is to bring
a way to change the user's message archiving preferences (something very
basic, so that we keep things simple
The Purge API is something that I have been looking for, but the spec
doesn't appear to have any way of finding out what messages have been
purged from the archive, which means the local cache cannot be synced up
with archive without fetching it all.
Spencer
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:27 PM,
On 10 October 2013 16:22, Spencer MacDonald
spencer.macdonald.ot...@gmail.com wrote:
The Purge API is something that I have been looking for, but the spec
doesn't appear to have any way of finding out what messages have been purged
from the archive, which means the local cache cannot be synced
On 10 Oct 2013 11:23, Spencer MacDonald spencer.macdonald.ot...@gmail.com
wrote:
The Purge API is something that I have been looking for, but the spec
doesn't appear to have any way of finding out what messages have been
purged from the archive, which means the local cache cannot be synced up
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
But it's hard - I think there's a good argument for moving any purging and
resync to a different spec at least, and keeping MAM simple in scope.
Oh please oh please oh please, yes.
/K
On 10 October 2013 16:52, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
On 10 Oct 2013 11:23, Spencer MacDonald
spencer.macdonald.ot...@gmail.com wrote:
The Purge API is something that I have been looking for, but the spec
doesn't appear to have any way of finding out what messages have been purged
Also, expanding Spencer's point,
other clients connected to the account would also need to be notified
of the deletion - and they might be offline at the time.
What about exposing the archive as a pub-sub node? That would take care of
notifications and resyncing etc.
S.
--
Simon Tennant |
On 10 October 2013 17:17, Simon Tennant si...@buddycloud.com wrote:
Also, expanding Spencer's point,
other clients connected to the account would also need to be notified
of the deletion - and they might be offline at the time.
What about exposing the archive as a pub-sub node? That would
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Matthew Wild mwi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 October 2013 17:17, Simon Tennant si...@buddycloud.com wrote:
Also, expanding Spencer's point,
other clients connected to the account would also need to be notified
of the deletion - and they might be offline at
On 2013-10-10 17:52, Dave Cridland wrote:
But it's hard - I think there's a good argument for moving any purging and
resync to a different spec at least, and keeping MAM simple in scope.
Yes, we like simple.
If you want resync and deletion there's always XEP-0136 :)
signature.asc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/10/2013 02:33 PM, Kim Alvefur wrote:
On 2013-10-10 17:52, Dave Cridland wrote:
But it's hard - I think there's a good argument for moving any
purging and resync to a different spec at least, and keeping MAM
simple in scope.
Yes, we like
Hello everyone,I'm re-escalating my request for XEP-0313 update, which purpose is to bring a way to change the user's message archiving preferences (something very basic, so that we keep things simple and respect the philosophy of MAM which is to remove the burden of previous message archiving
19 matches
Mail list logo
