First of all, a word of thanks to all the developers and contributors.
I have a question which I don't even know rather belongs to this forum or not. These are questions about the future development directions of Pidgin, my second favorite open-source software application (sorry, the top spot still gives to Linux kernel).
I know that many people whine and wants video/voice capability in Pidgin. And I know that Pidgin had a plan but it was put off.
While I know nothing about development, the closer I look at it, I discover that even decide where to go in this topic of voice/video support is an extremely tricky one.
For example, when most people want voice/video capability, they really mean they want voice/video interoperability with other proprietary video/voice services, which is next to impossible to fulfill.
I am wondering, however, rather is there any thoughts on implementing standard SIP-based voice / video / SMS support to Pidgin. It still won't address the interoperability among most of other proprietary voice services, but I am hoping that SIP-based voip is going to carry enough weight that at least some of the smaller protocols will eventually adopt.
Any thoughts on THAT?
thanks all. you guys have set a high bar on what is a good quality software really is.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
They say ignorance is bliss. More like my comments will demonstrate mine. They aren't the thoughts you asked for, but your message got things bouncing around in my head.
Protocol interoperability has been accomplished in multiple domains. Are you saying that it is impractical implement interoperability between 2 proprietary protocols or all protocols?
If the former is feasible would it be possible to distill a meta-protocol that could be mapped to proprietary services?
That could provide a partial solution.
If it can be done it seems likely server based protocol conversion would be impractical. Divide and conquer. Conversion filters could be pushed out to clients as local proxies.
This a tweaked version of the architecture used by Tymnet, a pre-internet privately owned, public data communications network. They had a financial incentive to provide transparency.
I'm not sure, but Jabber's architecture must be a variation on this theme.
All the above may be chasing ghosts. History has demonstrated the power of the market place to create standards.
Your thoughts on SIP becoming a standard is astute. Millions and billions of cell phones may be a baby gorilla.
david
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Dear all:
First of all, a word of thanks to all the developers and contributors.
I have a question which I don't even know rather belongs to this forum or not. These are questions about the future development directions of Pidgin, my second favorite open-source software application (sorry, the top spot still gives to Linux kernel).
I know that many people whine and wants video/voice capability in Pidgin. And I know that Pidgin had a plan but it was put off.
While I know nothing about development, the closer I look at it, I discover that even decide where to go in this topic of voice/video support is an extremely tricky one.
For example, when most people want voice/video capability, they really mean they want voice/video interoperability with other proprietary video/voice services, which is next to impossible to fulfill.
I am wondering, however, rather is there any thoughts on implementing standard SIP-based voice / video / SMS support to Pidgin. It still won't address the interoperability among most of other proprietary voice services, but I am hoping that SIP-based voip is going to carry enough weight that at least some of the smaller protocols will eventually adopt.
Any thoughts on THAT?
thanks all. you guys have set a high bar on what is a good quality software really is.
Thanks for your interest and efforts.
They say ignorance is bliss. More like my comments will demonstrate mine. They aren't the thoughts you asked for, but your message got things bouncing around in my head.
Protocol interoperability has been accomplished in multiple domains. Are you saying that it is impractical implement interoperability between 2 proprietary protocols or all protocols?
If the former is feasible would it be possible to distill a meta-protocol that could be mapped to proprietary services?
That could provide a partial solution.
If it can be done it seems likely server based protocol conversion would be impractical. Divide and conquer. Conversion filters could be pushed out to clients as local proxies.
This a tweaked version of the architecture used by Tymnet, a pre-internet privately owned, public data communications network. They had a financial incentive to provide transparency.
I'm not sure, but Jabber's architecture must be a variation on this theme.
All the above may be chasing ghosts. History has demonstrated the power of the market place to create standards.
Your thoughts on SIP becoming a standard is astute. Millions and billions of cell phones may be a baby gorilla.
david