On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:55, Michael Jakl<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:08, Bernd > Fondermann<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 20:57, Michael Jakl<[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 16:25, Niklas Gustavsson<[email protected]> wrote: >>> How shall we cope with the special smack libs? It seems that the >>> required smack lib is from the development branch. >> >> Why would we use this library, anyway? >> For the simple client, with no node configuration etc happening, >> self-crafted stanzas would be totally sufficient. > > I think a demo with "off the shelf" components would be more > "trustworthy" than with hand-crafted stanzas.
Don't know. smack rocks, but the pubsub extension is pretty young. I would not play down the expressiveness of hand-crafting. > Since we had some issues > with the lib this is still an option. If you get benefits from this lib (or just don't want to re-implement), please go ahead. As a lazy guy, who doesn't want to look into how smack-pubsub works ATM, please tell me, what's this lib doing /beyond/ supporting the creation of pubsub stanzas? Cheers, Bernd
