3 ms·
Why do you say that the author knows what he's doing? If your statement is based his work on Jabber (now called XMPP), then I am somewhat concerned. Several de
by BarkMore 16y ago
Why do you say that the author knows what he's doing? If your statement is based his work on Jabber (now called XMPP), then I am somewhat concerned. Several design decisions make Jabber difficult to implement with no benefit to the use cases. My previous comments about Jabber design decisions are here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2071652 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2071652
- dminor 16y ago> Why do you say that the author knows what he's doing? Jeremie Miller wrote a popular open source IM server and created a specification for the protocol which has been widely implemented in several different languages (Erlang, C, Python to name a few) for both client and server. Many of the functions solved by XMPP (instant messaging, presence, federation) fit nicely into the distributed social network problem domain. So that's why I have confidence that he knows what he's doing. Nits like "I don't like different XML namespaces" more or less miss the forest for the trees.
- BarkMore 16y agoI agree that my previous rant was about nits, but these nits add up and act as a barrier to entry to development in the space. You mention that XMPP is widely implemented on the server, but only a few of the implementations are actually any good. To make matters worse, some of the best server implementations are written in fringe languages (Erlang for example). I think that XMPP would be more successful if it had been more developer friendly.
- kwellman 16y agoHave you looked at telehash (http://www.telehash.org http://www.telehash.org), a much more recent project by the same guy? I'm impressed by how elegant the protocol is. I hate XMPP, but telehash gives me faith.