On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 23:38:49 -0400, Nathan Walp wrote:
> Not to be mean, but...
> Please don't waste your time on this.
It's really not a huge amount of time, because I didn't plan on
implementing the HTTP server that jabber:iq:oob uses. It would have been
a requirement that the user have an HTTP server already with space on the
local filesystem (i.e. ~/public_html as one example) where gaim could put
files to be sent and refer the remote client to.
It really is only a matter of hooking the existing UI file transfer code
in, and producing a:
<iq type='set' from='...' to='...' id='oob1'>
message to the remote user. That's it.
> The file receiving support that
> jabber has right now is for the old "standard" for jabber file sharing.
Yes, "JEP-0066: Out of Band Data"
> There are currently several new proposed standards in the works, and
> when one of those is approved, Gaim will support it shortly thereafter.
That is great. But why wait until then for a feature that could work
today? The OOB method is present in at least one other IM (Gabber) and
the receiving code is in Jabber currently.
It's true that standards evolve. Why not deal with and use standards that
are in place today and evolve with them rather than doing nothing, holding
out for the holy grail?
> Until that happens, I won't accept a patch to do Jabber file transfer.
This is sad to hear. Why not? What does it harm to have Gaim do file
transfer today with what it working and implemented (in other clients too)
and evolve to the new standard as it becomes official and more widely used?
To look at it another way, even when the standard does evolve, other
clients that already use OOB to transfer files will have to evolve too.
They might not be in such a hurry because they are already using something
that works. Gaim will have to wait until they evolve before any client
interoperability is achieved. Or it can do that today and evolve with