On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 01:08:49PM +0200, Georg Lukas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> error type stanzas are currently ephemeral, and not taken seriously by
> many (client) developers. As one step in increasing the (perceived)
> reliability of XMPP messaging, I'd like to make message errors
> persistent, so
> On 1 Aug 2019, at 19:42, Ненахов Андрей
> wrote:
>
> I imagine that a proper solution to this problem might be something
> like... reactions? If we do reactions with some kind of attached
> message, errors might be a special kind of attachments. Thinking
> further, I like it even more:
Our reliable message delivery protocol that we use to replace stream
management makes half of message errors mostly unnecessary: we
consider that message is delivered to server only when we receive
confirmation with server ID and timestamp assigned to this message. If
you don't have server ID, you
On Donnerstag, 1. August 2019 13:08:49 CEST Georg Lukas wrote:
> Obviously, this should only happen for direct messages and PMs, not for
> type=groupchat ones.
Should this have been directly below point 4? Otherwise I’m not sure how to
interpret type=groupchat in the context of error messages.
Hi,
error type stanzas are currently ephemeral, and not taken seriously by
many (client) developers. As one step in increasing the (perceived)
reliability of XMPP messaging, I'd like to make message errors
persistent, so that users can better gauge which of their messages
actually arrived at the
