[JDEV] Promiscuous presence for user communities (with patch)

[Nicholas Perez]

Steven Brown wrote:

>It could also be implemented as an optional namespace under <presence>,
>e.g., the client could send <presence type="available"><promiscuous
>xmlns="..."/>...</presence> and capable servers would use it and
>incapable servers would ignore it and just treat it as a normal
>'available' presence.  That wouldn't modify the protocol afaik.  I
>figured it would make more sense as a type due to the way 'invisible'
>had been implemented as a type instead of making it a tag under a
>type="unavailable".  Would the promiscuous tag under presence as
>mentioned be better?
>  
>
Presence is already a rather large payload for its given task. That is 
alot of bandwidth for non-conforming servers. And it is changing the 
protocol. Substantially. If your kind of misfeature is let go unchecked, 
it only encourages other misfeatures. If you want this kind of change to 
the protocol, then please take the time to write a jep and submit it for 
peer review on the Standards JIG mailing list. While the protocol may be 
considered Open or Open Source, it doesn't mean you can be "willy-nilly" 
with regards to changes. The days of radical protocol changes are in the 
distant past, and we have a large userbase to consider now. Simply 
adding something and saying "non-conforming clients/servers can just 
ignore it" takes a giant crap in our punch bowl of an organization we 
have carefully built, and meticulously control. You of course are more 
than welcome to make whatever changes to the reference implementation 
server, according to the license, but the modifications to the protocol 
are subject to copyright and trademark issues.