On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:52:14AM +0500, Andrew Nenakhov wrote:
> ср, 1 апр. 2020 г. в 01:59, Denver Gingerich :
>
> > It might, but I have never found a client/server combination where both
> > have implemented this XEP that causes notifications to be delivered to an
> >
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:42:31AM +0500, Andrew Nenakhov wrote:
> This is our findings from a work in progress, once we have a
> production-ready working client, server and app server, we'll publish our
> protocol with more details and description of covered cases.
I am very much looking forward
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 08:38:20PM -, Jonas Schäfer wrote:
> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on
> XEP-0357.
>
> Title: Push Notifications
> Abstract:
> This specification defines a way for an XMPP servers to deliver
> information for use in push notifications to mob
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 05:37:51PM +, Denver Gingerich wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:13:13PM -0500, Sam Whited wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, at 11:42, Jonas Schäfer wrote:
> > > - Is in Draft and you think should move on to Final
> >
> > Similarly to
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:13:13PM -0500, Sam Whited wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, at 11:42, Jonas Schäfer wrote:
> > - Is in Draft and you think should move on to Final
>
> Similarly to carbons, XEP-0066: Out of Band Data [3] should move forward
> or be deprecated. Given how well it works in the
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 08:33:54PM +, Tedd Sterr wrote:
> In search of clarity, here are all of the reasons against that I can think
> of, and replies to those. Please correct me if I've misunderstood anything;
> and additional sensible reasons are also welcome.
[...]
At the risk of further
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 08:47:50AM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/8/18 2:33 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> > I'm aware of people experimenting with this on ad-hoc networks such as
> > emergent vehicle networks.
>
> I heard about such things years ago, too. Are those active projects?
I can't s
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 08:59:01AM +, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2018, at 16:57, Simon Friedberger wrote:
> > E3. Simply make the ID: FROM-TIMESTAMP.
> > Here FROM needs to be the eventual FROM after possible
> > rewriting. Can
> > that be done?
> > And TIMESTAM
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 04:05:10PM +0200, Goffi wrote:
> Markdown is a terrible choice because:
>
> 1) as its name state it's a writting syntax and not a publishing one. There
> is
> not such thing as invalid Markdown (every text is valid Markdown), but the
> result will differ according to ren
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:27:43AM +0200, Goffi wrote:
> There are dozen of flavours of [Markdown], not always compatibles, it's not a
> syntax adapted for XML, and it's really limited (no table/color by default
> for
> instance). Markdown is not standardized, which make it quite a bad choice to
On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 02:11:06PM +0200, Philipp Hörist wrote:
> Conversations implements and uses Jingle for FT.
> And Dino is a bit new and i think there are more important things on the
> TODO list then jingle.
> Switft and Gajim also implement Jingle.
Yes, file transfer over Jingle with Gajim
11 matches
Mail list logo
