On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 19:25:40 +0200, Julian Missig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005, at 11:30, Kevin Smith wrote:
But what do you think the feasibility of
me writing patches for some of the popular open source clients is?
It depends what you want I guess; people might be reticent to apply
patches that complicate the ui, such as having genuine
multithreaded chats, but probably willing (provided they're better
at managing patches than me ;)) to commit a patch that makes the
client assign a thread to a chat window.
Exactly. Focus on getting clients to maintain thread IDs and generate
new ones automatically. Even if they're not completely accurate, it's
better than nothing.
I would disagree. Clients that don't support true "multithreading" should
not be sending out or replying to thread ID's. After all there is no
thread. The only way for other clients to find out wether another client
supports threads or not is by doing this.
When a client sends back messages of type="chat" without a thread ID, then
you know there's only "one thread". (thus clients that do support multiple
threads know not to open more than one thread to that clients, because
messages would get mixed up between them). What else would you want a
thread ID for? To maintain some sort of session? The behaviour for that is
*very* undefined, so I would advise not to rely on it.
_______________________________________________
jdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
