On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 19:16 +0000, Alexander Jones wrote: > > I have a few implementation observations with respect to Jingle. The > > current implementation really requires all Jingle stuff to be managed > > centrally in an app. For example, you need a "Jingle engine" that things > > like file transfer and audio chat need to register with. This is > > problematic if you are implementing a Jabber client where all of the > > features are plug-ins.
> Why not have a Jingle plugin, and AV Chat and File Transfer could > require its services? Agreed. Reimplementing Jingle in each of the functional plugins seems like the wrong answer; having some kind of nested plugin structure would be better.
