Sat, 27 May 2017 10:22:27 +0200 Daniel Gultsch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2017-05-27 6:39 GMT+02:00 Evgeny Khramtsov <[email protected]>: > > Fri, 26 May 2017 18:41:17 +0200 > > Daniel Gultsch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> would sending in presence work? > > > > If we choose to use presences, then why even bother with putting > > caps in features? > > Fair question. Maybe to avoid a race condition where the client > queries the disco node before receiving the presence? > > > > If we choose to use stream elements, we can send <caps/> nonza. I > > think there should be some consistency. > > This will require some signaling from the client that it is able to > parse those nonzas. Otherwise some clients might break if they > suddenly receive unknown stanzas? > But this signaling could be done with a caps feature? (The server does > have the clients feature list anyway, right?) Frankly, I don't know which way is better. I'm just against semi-working solutions, because stale disco cache is bad and will lead to bad UX: this will spawn "bug" reports like "hey, my xmpp client doesn't see the feature my server is providing, but it works only when I reconnect". So we either develop a solution or drop caps from features at all. I also think that disco cache is a bit more broad question, e.g. it would be great to cache effectively features of services, rooms, etc. The current approach as I understand is to use polling or disco "pre-requests" which is PITA for client developers (most of them actually ignore it). _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
