Hi everyone,
Just bouncing back this discussion again. I'd like to see what we can decide at
the moment based on the information that we have here.
I'll add a couple of information there, those are simple technical limitation
that will guide our decisions regarding this problem.
ejabberd is
On 3/6/18 1:02 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Thank you very much for the clarification, comments inline.
>
> On Dienstag, 6. März 2018 02:59:04 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 3/5/18 12:17 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
>>> On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 19:42:39 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thank you very much for the clarification, comments inline.
On Dienstag, 6. März 2018 02:59:04 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/5/18 12:17 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> > On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 19:42:39 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >> On 3/4/18 10:54 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
>
On 3/5/18 12:17 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 19:42:39 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 3/4/18 10:54 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
>>> On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 17:02:07 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
If we want to specify this, I would recommend the UsernameCaseMapped
On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 19:42:39 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/4/18 10:54 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> > On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 17:02:07 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >> If we want to specify this, I would recommend the UsernameCaseMapped
> >> profile defined in RFC 8265.
> >>
> >>
On 04.03.2018 17:02, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/4/18 1:27 AM, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>> On 04.03.2018 02:30, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On Mar 3, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
Thanks for the answers. I'm fine for the 3071 limitation, so we can set it
On 3/4/18 10:54 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 17:02:07 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> If we want to specify this, I would recommend the UsernameCaseMapped
>> profile defined in RFC 8265.
>>
>> However, there's a twist: if a node ID can be a full JID, then do we
>> want to
On Sonntag, 4. März 2018 17:02:07 CET Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> If we want to specify this, I would recommend the UsernameCaseMapped
> profile defined in RFC 8265.
>
> However, there's a twist: if a node ID can be a full JID, then do we
> want to apply the normal rules of RFC 7622 to all the JID
On 3/4/18 1:27 AM, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 04.03.2018 02:30, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> On Mar 3, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the answers. I'm fine for the 3071 limitation, so we can set it
>>> both for the Pubsub nodes id and
On 04.03.2018 02:30, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On Mar 3, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for the answers. I'm fine for the 3071 limitation, so we can set it
>> both for the Pubsub nodes id and Pubsub items it?
>> If yes I'm ok to do a PR on the
> On Mar 3, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
>
>> Le jeudi 01 mars 2018 à 07:10 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
>>> On 3/1/18 1:07 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
On Donnerstag, 1. März 2018 08:52:29 CET Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter
Le jeudi 01 mars 2018 à 07:10 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
> On 3/1/18 1:07 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> > On Donnerstag, 1. März 2018 08:52:29 CET Florian Schmaus wrote:
> > > On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > > On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> >
On 3/1/18 1:07 AM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 1. März 2018 08:52:29 CET Florian Schmaus wrote:
>> On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
Hi,
I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim.
On 1 Mar 2018, at 08:07, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
>
> On Donnerstag, 1. März 2018 08:52:29 CET Florian Schmaus wrote:
>> On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
Hi,
I came across a database limitation while
On Donnerstag, 1. März 2018 08:52:29 CET Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim.
> >>
> >> I'd like to know if we have a
On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim.
>>
>> I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items
>> ids in Pubsub (like we have for
On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim.
>
> I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items
> ids in Pubsub (like we have for the JIDs).
> Also do we have some specific forbid
Hi,
I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim.
I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items ids
in Pubsub (like we have for the JIDs).
Also do we have some specific forbid characters, basically what is the format
of such attributes?
18 matches
Mail list logo