Michael Jakl wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 22:59, Bernd > Fondermann<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 13:48, Michael Jakl<[email protected]> wrote: >>> Since the clients run under the same hood, checking whether a message >>> arrives within a certain amount of time should be easy. With more than >>> one client-implementation the chances are high that we catch >>> interoperability bugs earlier. >> +1 for the general idea. -0 for doing this. Vysper is about a spec >> conforming server implementation, not about clients. >> If there are clients with interop problems, well, just fix *them* >> first (but let's still be liberal in what the server accepts, within >> the scope of the spec). >> If the server has a problem, write a test for that. > > "Interoperability bug" was not exactly the correct wording. The goal > was to identify server bugs by using "proven" clients. I'm also -0 for > doing this right now, but it seems like a cheap way for doing > spec-conformance tests (if there are no better ways).
+1. Ok, now I get it. Currently, our use of Smack is not very systematic. We can improve this, but I'd stick to one client lib. Smack is ok for me. I kicked this off because Niklas plans to implement the Ping XEP and I assumed he's looking for a way to write proper tests for it. And I just wanted to point out that there might be good ways to do that without needing a fully-fledged running server and scripting a client. Bernd
