Re: Jabber
Cory McWilliams <[email protected]> Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:10:14 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.everybuddy.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sunday 21 March 2004 10:32 pm, Rodney Dawes wrote: > On Die , 2004-03-21 at 11:26, Cory McWilliams wrote: > > I checked some Jabber code in to trunk several weeks ago. > > I just pulled bleeding and noticed a jabber plug-in in it. > It wasn't being built, so I built and installed it. > > > Has anyone noticed it and been able to try it out? Please do, if you > > can. I think it's fairly solid (though I fear I've made some horrible > > mistake somewhere. :P), and I think it's about almost as complete as most > > of the other plugins. > > It seems to log in, send and receive messages, log out, and spew a bunch > of XML on the eb-lite stdout. :) Ah, hehe...yeah. Sorry about that. Group chat should be in working order, too, though there are a lot of possible features (moderation, topics, ...) that I haven't covered. > > > I have a few minor changes I've had on the back of my mind, but I'm > > really not sure how far to take this. What features would people want > > from it? > > Is there any reason you aren't using a jabber library that already has > all of the features, and just plugging that in to the eb core? Have you > looked at loudmouth or any of the other jabber libs? Yes, I tried my best to find something appropriate so that I wouldn't need to do much work. Everything I found either seemed so low-level that I might as well do it myself or required dependencies above and beyond what people seemed to want for the core. Loudmouth seems to do both. It requires glibc, and unless I'm missing something, it doesn't do much beside managing connections and translations between XML and structured representations of the data. My biggest problem seems to be interpreting messages at a higher level. I am certainly not opposed to taking a different route. My current position is that it was easy enough to pull this together that it's not necessary to use something else that might not quite fit our requirements. Any other opinions on this? In any case, do any of the other protocols implement registering accounts? I wouldn't mind handling that, but I don't see how it would fit in. Thanks, Cory