On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:18:05PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10/19/09 6:01 AM, Guenther Niess wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 03:46:16PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> On 4/24/09 10:45 AM, Jiří Zárevúcký wrote: > >>> ... > >>> The other problem I encountered is initial subject and ejabberd's > >>> weird way of announcing it. Letting aside ejabberd's buggy support, it > >>> is not even clearly stated in the spec how exactly should the last > >>> subject change be sent. > >> I never noticed that. > > > > On the Openfire forum [1] we have a similar discussion. At the moment > > Openfire handle the subject change as a "normal" chat message, which > > means when the subject was changed it saves it in the message history > > with a timestamp and therefore a new participant may receive at joining > > the last subject modification if its in the range of the requested > > message history (or the default history setting). > > After the discussion, I begin to think that this subject change message > > when someone joins a chat room hasn't much to do with the history and > > should be sent anyway. Maybe it hasn't the intention to notify who and > > when the subject was changed but rather what the current subject is? > > How exactly are those different? IMHO the intent is to inform you what > the subject is, no matter when the subject was last changed.
I thought too complicated. Our problem is, if a client requests a limited history how should this limit affect the last subject? So after your help I think we should prefer the last subject change and after that we can add more chat history if it's in the limit and if the user requests no history we don't send the last subject. Thank you Guenther Niess
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
