mwolson.org Blog - /Quotes

Wed, 25 Oct 2006

IRC naivete

Why not move the Ubuntu [IRC] channels to Jabber? Jabber provides a feature called MUC, where Jabber users can create chat rooms on a jabber server to communicate with each other. Here are possible reasons why the Ubuntu channels should move to jabber:

* From the rational point this is a better solution, because you can use your existing IM program like Gaim and Kopete to connect to the chat channels.

* In Jabber the Server communicate among each other, which means that a user which has an account on jabber server a can enter a channel on server b without connecting to server b and identifying on server b.

* Ubuntu as a free distribution should support the spreading of open and standardized protocols in the IM world.

What do you guys think about that ?

Name omitted to spare the innocent [original quote]

Priceless example of IRC naivete.

  1. Moving many, many channels to a new medium is a pain.
  2. The "rational point" does not hold, since almost any modern, Free, chat client can connect to IRC.
  3. Unless you actually have an account on the same server as the one the channel is on, that channel still has to travel over the ether.
  4. IRC is already open, and has a much simpler protocol than Jabber.

There are some arguments to be made in Jabber's favor if you want an organization-specific chat network that should not propagate outside of your organization. Jabber might also be better if you want to have private conversation, but honestly, that does not make sense for an open community (with the exception of security issues). Otherwise, IRC is The Right Thing.

Update
Edited this to be a bit gentler, since the original poster has responded reasonably well to the suggestions that I made here.

Posted by Alex Schroeder at Thu Oct 26 11:50:44 2006

IRC doesn't have a way to specify the encoding or special application-specific content as meta-data. You have to agree on these out-of-band. In practice that has not been a problem, obviously. :)

Posted by Michael Olson at Fri Oct 27 09:36:42 2006

*edit*
I don't fully understand what you mean by either "encoding" or "application-specific content".  Can you elaborate?

My initial reaction is that metadata doesn't add much and the encoding problem seems to be mainly solved. I could be missing something, though.

Add a comment

Name: 
Your email address: 
Your website: 
 
Comment: