[Telepathy] ejabberd server component with empathy

[mikhail.zabaluev at nokia.com]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: telepathy-
> bounces+mikhail.zabaluev=nokia.com at lists.freedesktop.org
> [mailto:telepathy-
> bounces+mikhail.zabaluev=nokia.com at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of
> ext Will Thompson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 6:02 PM
> To: telepathy at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Telepathy] ejabberd server component with empathy
> 
> On 08/02/11 15:38, mikhail.zabaluev at nokia.com wrote:
> > Why? service.example.com should be as valid a JID as any other, no?
> 
> I think the rationale is to avoid confusing errors for users who enter
> "foo.bar", expecting to talk to "foo.bar at gmail.com", or add them to
> their roster.
> 
> I notice that Empathy just silently ignores the failing channel
> request,
> though. Excitingly, Gabble doesn't seem to emit a failed delivery
> report
> if I try to send messages to "lol at lol.whut", despite receiving an error
> on the wire, because Prosody doesn't include the <body/> element we
> tried to send in the error it sends back. (A send error/delivery report
> is emitted when I try this via ejabberd, which includes <body/>.) I've
> filed <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34039> for this
> isue.
> 
> I wonder whether the rationale is basically wrong, and we should allow
> it, and ensure that we report errors properly and possibly include
> hints
> in the UI as to what contact IDs should look like on each network. (For
> instance, if the CM says something like “domain not found”, hint “did
> you mean lol.whut at gmail.com?”.)
> 
> Either that, or we want a way—Addressing? ;-)—to explicitly label “this
> is a server-like JID”.

Well, only if you want to grandfather in the current fuzzy behavior.
OTOH, Addressing perhaps needs to be treated more formally, so it can be used to say "I want exactly this JID".

Best regards,
  Mikhail