On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Yann Leboulanger <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/15/2012 05:48 PM, Kevin Smith wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Yann Leboulanger<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I was wonder what should I do in this situation: >>> user A and B are connected with resource r1. They that, so messages go >>> from >>> A/r1 to B/r1. >>> >>> user B connects a second client with resource r2 with a higher priority. >>> >>> Where should go next message of user A? >> >> >> While I think 296 promotes unlocking more often than it should, in >> this case I agree with it - the next message should go to the bare >> JID. That a new resource has come online suggests a significant change >> in the user's state. > > > Even if resource has a lower prio?
Yes, I think so. > I can thin of a case where it's not nice: if I start my mobile phone, I come > online with a second resource with lower prio, and I don't want my encrypted > sessions to be stopped because of that ... I agree that this isn't a nice scenario, but it's not clear to me what would be better - leaving chats locked after other resources have come online is a demonstrably bad thing in many circumstances, and relying on priority for anything doesn't seem like a good solution. /K
