[jdev] MUC and PubSub together?

[Matthew Wild]

On 29 May 2012 19:23, Kevin Smith <kevin at kismith.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Matthew Wild <mwild1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 29 May 2012 18:46, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
>>> On 5/29/12 11:39 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>>> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Theo Cushion <theo at jivatechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>> This is something we are interested in doing as well. Our use case is that people could be involved in multiple discussions, but only actually want to join a room if something interesting is going on (for example, missed messages or a user joining the room). The Pubsub mechanism would provide a great choice for this as it means the node can be configured so that the client does not have to request any of this information, or join a room in order to receive updates.
>>>>
>>>> The most elegant way of doing this would be to have a pubsub service
>>>> running on the MUC JID, just as PEP is a pubsub service running on a
>>>> user's JID.
>>>
>>> Right, we've traditionally called this "MEP" (MUC Eventing Protocol) but
>>> we've never defined the feature more fully than giving it a name.
>>
>> I did some experiments around this some time back:
>> http://blog.prosody.im/multi-user-chat-gets-rich/
>>
>> However there are various approaches to tackling the problem, and I
>> gather that many people don't think mine was the best. We had a group
>> discussion on alternatives in Brussels in 2011, but again the
>> conclusion was that all approaches had drawbacks, some being
>> incredibly complicated - and so no consensus was reached.
>
> Wasn't your post about a different problem? I thought it was about
> users publishing their own data (PEP through MUC) rather than having
> data attached to the room.

The thread turned to PEP-in-MUC, aka MEP which is, in my
understanding, occupants publishing data to other occupants. You're
right, this isn't what the OP asked about, which is more linking a
pubsub node to a MUC.

To offer my 2p on that specific problem, it just sounds like some
custom server-side code is needed (probably in the MUC
implementation). Discovering the node is perhaps something that could
be solved at the protocol level, it's not the first time I've seen
people wanting to link pubsub nodes to MUC rooms (though with slightly
different goals - usually for in-room occupants to share data out of
band).

Regards,
Matthew