How about bringing that back into action? Maybe this time it can also check for S2S connectivity, latency from various geographic positions, etc.
Add to that a logging system so the server reliability history can be graphed and users will get a powerful tool to sort out the highest quality servers. :-)
Justin Karneges wrote:
On Thursday 23 October 2003 12:58 pm, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
are created, more and more users register on those servers, but users
often change their minds and their servers at the same occasion.
Part of this can be blamed on the fact that the JSF server list totally sucks. It only tells you about the components each server has, and nothing about userbase, availability, throughput, etc, of said server. Nor does it give any details about who is running the server or even a way to reach the admin, so you don't know if it is a "fly-by-night" server that is going to be gone the next day.
When people are first introduced to Jabber, I think they either pick jabber.org or a server with the coolest sounding name, and then they are disappointed with the selected server's reliability, speed, etc and end up switching servers soon after. The JSF website needs to stop giving bad recommendations so these problems never happen in the first place. In my opinion, we need much stronger requirements for getting listed on the "Public Servers" page.
-Justin
_______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
