Re: "id" account param and property

Martyn said on bug #391284:

« OK we can resolve this on the dev list. I need to think about it some
more
before I respond, it is difficult. For Jabber, do we use "account" or
"id" for
the jid (just out of interest)? I want to resolve a plan of action here
before
we commit the merge patch (i.e. I want to make a decision on the dev
list about
if this should be fixed before we merge or after and fix it up later). »

Currently gossip HEAD uses a "id" property and don't have the "id"
parameter. What I suggest is to make a difference between 2 concepts:

1) The "account" parameter that doesn't exists in gossip HEAD yet but is
introduced by my merge patch. This is the jid, if we use normal gossip
(with my patch applied) or gossip-telepathy with a gabble account. It's
used to connect the account. This param doesn't exists with certain
special protocols (link-local) and is not unique (with IRC the "account"
param is the nickname that can be reused in multiple accounts).

2) The "id" property that is currently used in gossip HEAD for
connection jabber accounts and identify accounts. So the "id" property
has to be unique. For jabber protocols the jid is unique so we can use
it for the account "id" property (so "account" param and "id" property
have the same value). For other protocols like link-local or IRC the
"id" property should take another value than just the "account" param
(because it doesn't exists or isn't unique), telepathy spec has a way to
request a unique name for each protocol once the account is connected.
So the "id" property is set to that value once the account is connected.

We have 2 concepts here, a "account" parameter when required to connect
the account and a "id" property to identify an account uniquely. They
can have the same value, up to the backend to manage that. I know gossip
still mix that a bit, but I think my merge patch fix the confusion.

I can understand it's a bit confusing if we only look at the normal
gossip that only support jabber protocol to have a param and a property
with the same value in the end... but with multi-protocol in head I
think there are really 2 different concepts here even if for jabber
protocol the jid can be used for both.

Xavier.

_______________________________________________
Gossip-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.imendio.com/mailman/listinfo/gossip-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFpWCY6dEBUn2qPAMRAtUVAJ9VzMuBCAXLCamCdv22MOSekKDipACggZMr
pCM3DlpZtPkTKz9yVI8sTcc=
=Q1Gz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----