[jdev] The future of Jabber/XMPP?

[Matthew Wild]

On 27 August 2010 16:12, Evgeniy Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> 27.08.2010 23:14, Remko Tronçon wrote:
>>>
>>> XEP doesn't forbid such behaviour, as I posted above.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, we need to make it explicit that this is forbidden then. The
>> whole reason that PEP exists was to avoid spamming of extended
>> presence.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out that this wasn't 100% clear in the spec.
>
> Good move, Remko. Now ejabberd will violate your synthetic rules for sure.
> I'm completely disappointed in XSF: noone cares about implementations
> feedback anymore, it is much more funny to flame implementation wars instead
> of make all implementations happy.
>
> So we ended from what we started: PEP doesn't scale.
>

Do you have a better solution that doesn't have the issues your
implementation has? All we want are working specifications, and that's
what we're aiming to develop.

The only cries I've heard that PEP doesn't scale seem to be coming
from folk involved in ejabberd. I'm not sure why that is.

Matthew