Sander Devrieze wrote: > 2008/4/8, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I am not convinced that working on transports is an >> appropriate topic for the Google Summer of Code. I plan to give my votes >> to projects that improve or extend XMPP itself, not provide bridges to >> closed technologies. > > I do not agree on this.
Yeah, but you don't have a vote. :P > Good transports are advantageous for XMPP. As > I already wrote on http://coccinella.im/whytransportsmatter --> "More > and better transports are needed to allow XMPP clients to compete > effectively with the key feature of multiprotocol clients: > interoperability with multiple closed networks. Multiprotocol clients > can't innovate as fast as XMPP clients can (see above), so we can > tackle them on the interoperability feature which is XMPP's core > feature." I don't disagree from the client perspective. But my philosophy has always been to make XMPP as great as it can be, then everyone else will eventually decide that they need to use XMPP and not some proprietary garbage. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
