My review of the PR is that, although I agree entirely with the sentiment, this
change would be breaking, and by itself is not worth the namespace fracturing.
Looking at Jingle code I currently have deployed in production systems, the
expectation that a session or content accept action includes
I agree. The empty transport elements is one of the approaches. I thought
about it. But then I thought "if every transport may declare it's own set
of obligatory transport attributes then why should I parse transport
elements at all figuring out whichi attributes are required and which not
if it
Am 22.06.19 um 17:18 schrieb Sergey Ilinykh:
In response to Council Minutes 2019-06-19
quote from
https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XEP-Remarks/XEP-0260:_Jingle_SOCKS5_Bytestreams_Transport_Method
Another problem with early (before accept) transport replace is the fact we
have to send the same offer
