http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15562
--- Comment #2 from Simon McVittie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-04-17 04:41:34 PST --- This seems quite subtle, and not something we want to rush into! When the "improved RequestChannel API" has landed, we'd like to be able to support XMPP thread IDs, which I think have similar use cases. I'd somewhat prefer to represent related conversations/messages/channels as "part of the same thread" rather than having some sort of "sub-contact" concept. So, instead of sending a MESSAGE to the channel-specific-handle for "Pekka as he appears in this particular call", it might be better if the UI opened a text channel that was somehow marked as related to the call, or had the same thread UUID as the call, or something; then the connection manager could deal with the nasty behind-the-scenes stuff in whatever way it thinks best. Perhaps this would imply that the text channel stopped working when the call closed; that's fine, it was "related" anyway. Channel-specific handles are a necessary evil in XMPP because it's possible to have contacts in a multi-user chat whose identity outside the MUC is not visible. I'd rather avoid polluting other implementations with CSHs if we can help it - they're a real pain to deal with! In XMPP it is in fact possible to have a private conversation with a contact in a MUC whose identity you don't know - in Gabble you open a text channel to their channel-specific handle, which will stop working if you or they leave the MUC. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ Telepathy mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
