Hi,
On Sep 19, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
Hi,
I don't know if this is the proper place to discuss this, but I
assume that all the client developers subscrive to jdev.
So Cisco acquired Jabber Inc, and with it I assume the Jabber
trademark.
What happens now to the Jabber
unsubscribe
___
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pedro Melo wrote:
Hi,
On Sep 19, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
Hi,
I don't know if this is the proper place to discuss this, but I
assume that all the client developers subscrive to jdev.
So Cisco acquired Jabber Inc, and with it I assume the Jabber
trademark.
What happens
2008/9/19 Pedro Melo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
I don't know if this is the proper place to discuss this, but I assume
that all the client developers subscrive to jdev.
So Cisco acquired Jabber Inc, and with it I assume the Jabber trademark.
What happens now to the Jabber trademark?
AFAIK
maybe Coccinella goes the correct way and other clients should follow?
I would be not surprised if some users think now hmmh, a Jabber
Client, it's for Cisco Networks/Hardware? or Jabber incoffer a client,
there are no prize on this site, but is this client a replaement for
it? or It's an own
Bishop, Michael W. CONTR J9C880 wrote:
unsubscribe
You can unsubscribe using the information in the footer:
___
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info:
Lastwebpage wrote:
maybe Coccinella goes the correct way and other clients should follow?
I would be not surprised if some users think now hmmh, a Jabber
Client, it's for Cisco Networks/Hardware? or Jabber incoffer a client,
there are no prize on this site, but is this client a replaement
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Lastwebpage wrote:
maybe Coccinella goes the correct way and other clients should follow?
I would be not surprised if some users think now hmmh, a Jabber
Client, it's for Cisco Networks/Hardware? or Jabber
Sebastiaan Deckers wrote:
Just as we went through the name change JSF - XSF, would it be a good
idea to consider the domain change jabber.org http://jabber.org -
xmpp.org http://xmpp.org?
Maybe. Right now, xmpp.org is just about the protocols. I'm not really
quite sure what the purpose of
2008/9/23 Sebastiaan Deckers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
snip
Just as we went through the name change JSF - XSF, would it be a good idea
to consider the domain change jabber.org - xmpp.org?
/me would prefer jabber.org - instantmessaging.im or im.im
Note: instant messaging == XMPP, legacy messaging ==
2008/9/23 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
snip
The term Jabber has always meant many things (an open-source server, a
company, a protocol, etc.) and we've worked to disambiguate those
meanings over time (jabberd, Jabber Inc., XMPP). If Jabber Inc. goes
away, then one of the sources of
As one of the few marketing folks here on this list, I'll interject my 2
cents which I very rarely do, and say based on the official press release
by Cisco corporateI would not put a bet on In the end, perhaps
Jabber will mean nothing at all. in the future...
Note not once are the characters
Geof wrote:
Note not once are the characters XMPP typed together in the release of
Jabber, Inc. acquisition..do you think that was by design, or by accident?
Doug Dennerline's blog post talks about extensible presence and messaging:
El Martes 23 Septiembre 2008, Peter Saint-Andre escribió:
Geof wrote:
Note not once are the characters XMPP typed together in the release of
Jabber, Inc. acquisition..do you think that was by design, or by
accident?
Doug Dennerline's blog post talks about extensible presence and
naw wrote:
To me, it seems that Cisco is trying to confuse people and make them think
that Cisco is the owner of the protocol/IM system/comunity.
Fortunately, you are wrong.
/psa
___
JDev mailing list
FAQ:
a wise old man once told me, Geof, right or WRONG, sometimes perception
becomes reality.
Do you not think Bill Gates and company would like to go back in time and
set the record straight on somethings that have morphed from perception into
reality?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Peter
Geof wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
naw wrote:
To me, it seems that Cisco is trying to confuse people and make
them think
that Cisco is the owner of the protocol/IM system/comunity.
17 matches
Mail list logo