Am 28.09.2011 00:25, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
On 9/27/11 4:07 PM, Alexander Holler wrote:
Am 26.09.2011 23:09, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
On 9/5/11 8:33 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
We're also asked about timeouts on rooms, too, from time to time.
That strikes me as a potentially useful feature.
That would be more something like a destroy-on-idle-for-n-hours room
configure option which I think could solve many problems. I assume every
MUC where everyone can create a room has to implement such an option in
one way or another to get rid of abandoned rooms. So I think too it
would be a good thing if clients could read such a (per XEP)
standardized option, even if it might be read-only.
Well, actually I think this is just an implementation-specific feature
(in essence, garbage collection for unused rooms). I am slightly less
convinced about "I want a chatroom until Time T".
With an "until" the problem would come up, what happens when I want the
room longer or what happens when the room still is in use. I think with
using an destroy-on-idle option the option "chatroom until" could be
"emulated" too (just set the idle timeout to how long you want the
room). And additionaly it would standardize something every muc-service
has to implement.
Regards,
Alexander
