From tamer23 at myrealbox.com Mon Mar 1 09:21:00 2004 From: tamer23 at myrealbox.com (Tamer) Date: Mon Mar 1 03:31:17 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] join the developer list?! Message-ID: <1078129260.c82b253ctamer23@myrealbox.com> YES! Jabber with Mozilla! Tell me what to do, and i do it. I have C++ Programming knowledge. I think Javascript isn't diffivult to learn, no?! -----Original Message----- From: derek To: jabberzilla@mozdev.org Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:35:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [Jabberzilla] join the developer list?! Tamer Higazi wrote: > I have asked myself i could take part joining the programmer list in > this team. Jabber for Mozilla would be a great thing. Hey, haven't seen a Jabberzilla message in a long time. Jabberzilla will rise again? Cool. _______________________________________________ Jabberzilla mailing list Jabberzilla@mozdev.org http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla From emurphy79 at cox.net Tue Mar 2 19:48:19 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Tue Mar 2 20:57:58 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status In-Reply-To: <4044F300.8020400@betterbilling.net> References: <4044F300.8020400@betterbilling.net> Message-ID: <40453963.1020006@cox.net> Hi everyone, I am still alive in case anyone wondered. Recently I started updating jabberzilla.mozdev.org to restart the project in a new direction. At the time, I was in the mood to do some work on the client (this is a couple of weeks ago). Of course, the mozdev server was so damn slow that I quickly lost interest again. I'm just sick of everything having to be so hard (it should not take 5 mins to update an html file). It's kind of hard to get anything done when the tools to do it don't work. Here is what I have on that page: This project has the goal to integrate Jabber instant messaging into the Mozilla Thunderbird mail client. The Jabber service would work much like Thunderbird's native functions of mail and newsgroups. Jabberzilla has been around since 2000, but was never finished with it's goal of becoming a stand-alone Jabber client. Now this project is starting over completely with a new set of goals, and new code. Hopefully that is a clear statement. This is totally different than any other Jabber client than I know of. Jabberzilla would become an add-on to Thunderbird to make IM functions appear to be "native" to the application. The less IM-specific GUI elements, the better. That is just my hope for a new Jabberzilla. Maybe that is the wrong approach to take, but I think it could potentially be revolutionary. Here is a question I got today: Carl Tanner wrote: > Is it possible to run jabberzilla as a rich internet app, without > requiring the user to download anything or ask the user for any kind > of permissions? Yes. Look at http://certs.mozdev.org, another one of my uncompleted projects. People would need to install a mozdev signing certificate and then they could be able to run JavaScript code that can open sockets, and do other priviledged actions. Its the same idea as SSL, like Verisign,etc. mozdev would be a Certificate Authority. Is it a good idea to have Jabberzilla be a remotely loaded client? Advantage: It does not have to be installed. Only a certificate needs to be installed. Disadvantage: It cannot integrate with other Mozilla/Firefox functions. I would rather have integration, because I can't see much advantage for a remotely loaded client. Plus there are probably hidden drawbacks that don't come up until something doesn't work right like it would locally. So do people want to restart the project? I am willing to help out as an adviser/manager mostly... providing advice such as this and handling misc issues. I program all day at work, and I just find it hard to come home and program more. I want Jabberzilla to live on, but don't have the energy to do it all by myself. The first thing that would need to be done is get a TCP socket working again. This has been a nagging issue ever since Jabberzilla started. They would break the fucking socket code with their Necko changes over and over. I have been hours and hours and hours dealing with that issue. Luckily Chatzilla was around after a while to steal code from. What someone would have to do is steal Chatzilla's latest socket code which uses an "Event Pump" design. The last time the socket broke, I tried to fix the existing based of some Necko changes with no luck. Then I tried getting the new Chatzilla event pump code to work to no avail. At the time is was very poorly designed, but maybe it's improved now. Its been a year. From there, the new socket code could be implemented with the JIM sources. And there you have a starting point, whether for a Thunderbird, or a normal Jabberzilla client. The JIM JavaScripts are much better than the old Jabberzilla JavaScripts, so definitely use those. Well, I am tired of typing, let me know if you seriously want to get the project going again. Thanks, Eric P.S. Mozilla now supports a server socket, so a client could do P2P file transfers now too. That was somethign I was waiting on for a long time. Just write a little dummy HTTP server to push a file back to the other person. From emurphy79 at cox.net Tue Mar 2 19:49:33 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Tue Mar 2 20:59:10 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] join the developer list?! In-Reply-To: <1078129260.c82b253ctamer23@myrealbox.com> References: <1078129260.c82b253ctamer23@myrealbox.com> Message-ID: <404539AD.5080401@cox.net> JavaScript is very fun. You should be able to pick it up quickly. Keep in mind its NOT like Java. Eric Tamer wrote: >YES! Jabber with Mozilla! >Tell me what to do, and i do it. I have C++ Programming knowledge. I think Javascript isn't diffivult to learn, no?! > >-----Original Message----- >From: derek >To: jabberzilla@mozdev.org >Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:35:49 -0500 >Subject: Re: [Jabberzilla] join the developer list?! > >Tamer Higazi wrote: > > >>I have asked myself i could take part joining the programmer list in >>this team. Jabber for Mozilla would be a great thing. >> >> > >Hey, haven't seen a Jabberzilla message in a long time. >Jabberzilla will rise again? >Cool. >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > > From emurphy79 at cox.net Tue Mar 2 20:14:20 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Tue Mar 2 21:23:54 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] A Good Read Message-ID: <40453F7C.2060009@cox.net> http://www.mozilla.org/events/dev-day-feb-2004/mozilla-futures/ Ideas about future of Mozilla. There is no mention of IM. BTW, remember the AOL client integrated into Netscape 7.0? Apparently that is a dead project since Netscape is dead, but I remember looking at some of its code, was rather interesting in places, like with its HTML messages. Might be worth looking at again for implementation ideas. Eric From sverma at sfsu.edu Tue Mar 2 18:27:05 2004 From: sverma at sfsu.edu (Sameer Verma) Date: Tue Mar 2 21:37:28 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] A Good Read In-Reply-To: <40453F7C.2060009@cox.net> References: <40453F7C.2060009@cox.net> Message-ID: <40454279.7080704@sfsu.edu> Eric Murphy wrote: > http://www.mozilla.org/events/dev-day-feb-2004/mozilla-futures/ > > Ideas about future of Mozilla. There is no mention of IM. > > BTW, remember the AOL client integrated into Netscape 7.0? Apparently > that is a dead project since Netscape is dead, but I remember looking > at some of its code, was rather interesting in places, like with its > HTML messages. Might be worth looking at again for implementation ideas. > > Eric > > _______________________________________________ > Jabberzilla mailing list > Jabberzilla@mozdev.org > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla From the looks of where Mozilla is going, it appears that there is a basic framework, with some key applications such as the browser, e-mail client, IRC client, etc. but the rest is open for implementation. The integration of a Jabber client can be done at the GUI level (an icon to kick off the chat client in a new window) or an application could piggy-back on the framework at a level deeper than the application layer...perhaps take advantage of transport level things provided by Mozilla (SSL support, etc). I would have been glad to jump into development, but my programming background is terrible :-). Sameer -- Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. Asst. Professor of Information Systems San Francisco State University San Francisco CA 94132 USA http://verma.sfsu.edu/ From neil.marshall at sympatico.ca Tue Mar 2 21:32:16 2004 From: neil.marshall at sympatico.ca (Neil Marshall) Date: Tue Mar 2 21:45:05 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status In-Reply-To: <40453963.1020006@cox.net> References: <4044F300.8020400@betterbilling.net> <40453963.1020006@cox.net> Message-ID: <404543B0.9010308@sympatico.ca> Eric Murphy wrote: > (it should not take 5 mins to update an html file). Yeah, that sucks. > This project has the goal to integrate Jabber instant messaging into > the Mozilla Thunderbird mail client. The Jabber service would work > much like Thunderbird's native functions of mail and newsgroups. Sounds good. That way it would be easy to send messages to MSN users when they're offline. > Is it a good idea to have Jabberzilla be a remotely loaded client? Wouldn't a java jabber client be better for this? If the user already has thunderbird, they should also have the ability to install extensions for it. The one problem with having it integrated with the mail client is all hell could break loose if a virus made it's way in. Instead of just using the address book it could also use the IM list on multiple networks. That would really suck. > So do people want to restart the project? I am willing to help out as > an adviser/manager mostly... providing advice such as this and > handling misc issues. I program all day at work, and I just find it > hard to come home and program more. I want Jabberzilla to live on, but > don't have the energy to do it all by myself. > I might be able to help out but I don't know the communication javascript too well (server and client stuff). I guess I'll take a look at chatzilla again and see if I can figure any of that stuff out. > The first thing that would need to be done is get a TCP socket working > again. This has been a nagging issue ever since Jabberzilla started. > They would break the fucking socket code with their Necko changes over > and over. Are they frozen now? > P.S. Mozilla now supports a server socket, so a client could do P2P > file transfers now too. That was somethign I was waiting on for a long > time. Just write a little dummy HTTP server to push a file back to the > other person. Someone is actually working on implementing DCC... this code might be able to be copied into Jabberzilla. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73257 From emurphy79 at cox.net Tue Mar 2 22:45:23 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Tue Mar 2 23:54:55 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status In-Reply-To: <404543B0.9010308@sympatico.ca> References: <4044F300.8020400@betterbilling.net> <40453963.1020006@cox.net> <404543B0.9010308@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <404562E3.40908@cox.net> >> This project has the goal to integrate Jabber instant messaging into >> the Mozilla Thunderbird mail client. The Jabber service would work >> much like Thunderbird's native functions of mail and newsgroups. > > > Sounds good. That way it would be easy to send messages to MSN users > when they're offline. Do you know if people are still using Jabber to do a lot of cross-network IM communications? I have not used Jabber in that fashion in a long time. >> Is it a good idea to have Jabberzilla be a remotely loaded client? > > > Wouldn't a java jabber client be better for this? If the user already > has thunderbird, they should also have the ability to install > extensions for it. There used to be one that was developed by Jabber, Inc a long time ago. The thing with an applet client is that it will only be able to connect to the same domain it's served from (mozdev.org). Its the way the Java security manager works. > The one problem with having it integrated with the mail client is all > hell could break loose if a virus made it's way in. Instead of just > using the address book it could also use the IM list on multiple > networks. That would really suck. We are not using Outlook here! ;-) Yeah, I don't even know how MS is handling MSN integration into Outlook, you'd think that they would be worried about it too. Anyway, it would be nice if Thunderbird + Jabberzilla had the number of users to cause problems... haha. >> So do people want to restart the project? I am willing to help out as >> an adviser/manager mostly... providing advice such as this and >> handling misc issues. I program all day at work, and I just find it >> hard to come home and program more. I want Jabberzilla to live on, >> but don't have the energy to do it all by myself. >> > I might be able to help out but I don't know the communication > javascript too well (server and client stuff). I guess I'll take a > look at chatzilla again and see if I can figure any of that stuff out. Yeah, its hard to follow. The Event pump shit makes it even worse. I don't understand why its necessary other than it allows you to queue up events (incoming data). There are simpler ways to do that if necessary in Jabberzilla. >> The first thing that would need to be done is get a TCP socket >> working again. This has been a nagging issue ever since Jabberzilla >> started. They would break the fucking socket code with their Necko >> changes over and over. > > > Are they frozen now? They better be! >> P.S. Mozilla now supports a server socket, so a client could do P2P >> file transfers now too. That was somethign I was waiting on for a >> long time. Just write a little dummy HTTP server to push a file back >> to the other person. > > > Someone is actually working on implementing DCC... this code might be > able to be copied into Jabberzilla. > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73257 Nice idea but I don't think other Jabber clients use DCC to transfer files. I think they all pretty much use their own little HTTP server, and only understand how to receive by HTTP. Thanks for the comments. Any help you can provide would be great. I am going to send an e-mail about the speed issues... this is horrible. Eric From jeremychone at hotmail.com Tue Mar 2 20:56:30 2004 From: jeremychone at hotmail.com (Jeremy Chone) Date: Wed Mar 3 00:07:07 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status In-Reply-To: <40453963.1020006@cox.net> Message-ID: Eric, This is great news. Jeremy, -----Original Message----- From: jabberzilla-bounces@mozdev.org [mailto:jabberzilla-bounces@mozdev.org] On Behalf Of Eric Murphy Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 5:48 PM To: jabberzilla@mozdev.org Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status Hi everyone, I am still alive in case anyone wondered. Recently I started updating jabberzilla.mozdev.org to restart the project in a new direction. At the time, I was in the mood to do some work on the client (this is a couple of weeks ago). Of course, the mozdev server was so damn slow that I quickly lost interest again. I'm just sick of everything having to be so hard (it should not take 5 mins to update an html file). It's kind of hard to get anything done when the tools to do it don't work. Here is what I have on that page: This project has the goal to integrate Jabber instant messaging into the Mozilla Thunderbird mail client. The Jabber service would work much like Thunderbird's native functions of mail and newsgroups. Jabberzilla has been around since 2000, but was never finished with it's goal of becoming a stand-alone Jabber client. Now this project is starting over completely with a new set of goals, and new code. Hopefully that is a clear statement. This is totally different than any other Jabber client than I know of. Jabberzilla would become an add-on to Thunderbird to make IM functions appear to be "native" to the application. The less IM-specific GUI elements, the better. That is just my hope for a new Jabberzilla. Maybe that is the wrong approach to take, but I think it could potentially be revolutionary. Here is a question I got today: Carl Tanner wrote: > Is it possible to run jabberzilla as a rich internet app, without > requiring the user to download anything or ask the user for any kind > of permissions? Yes. Look at http://certs.mozdev.org, another one of my uncompleted projects. People would need to install a mozdev signing certificate and then they could be able to run JavaScript code that can open sockets, and do other priviledged actions. Its the same idea as SSL, like Verisign,etc. mozdev would be a Certificate Authority. Is it a good idea to have Jabberzilla be a remotely loaded client? Advantage: It does not have to be installed. Only a certificate needs to be installed. Disadvantage: It cannot integrate with other Mozilla/Firefox functions. I would rather have integration, because I can't see much advantage for a remotely loaded client. Plus there are probably hidden drawbacks that don't come up until something doesn't work right like it would locally. So do people want to restart the project? I am willing to help out as an adviser/manager mostly... providing advice such as this and handling misc issues. I program all day at work, and I just find it hard to come home and program more. I want Jabberzilla to live on, but don't have the energy to do it all by myself. The first thing that would need to be done is get a TCP socket working again. This has been a nagging issue ever since Jabberzilla started. They would break the fucking socket code with their Necko changes over and over. I have been hours and hours and hours dealing with that issue. Luckily Chatzilla was around after a while to steal code from. What someone would have to do is steal Chatzilla's latest socket code which uses an "Event Pump" design. The last time the socket broke, I tried to fix the existing based of some Necko changes with no luck. Then I tried getting the new Chatzilla event pump code to work to no avail. At the time is was very poorly designed, but maybe it's improved now. Its been a year. From there, the new socket code could be implemented with the JIM sources. And there you have a starting point, whether for a Thunderbird, or a normal Jabberzilla client. The JIM JavaScripts are much better than the old Jabberzilla JavaScripts, so definitely use those. Well, I am tired of typing, let me know if you seriously want to get the project going again. Thanks, Eric P.S. Mozilla now supports a server socket, so a client could do P2P file transfers now too. That was somethign I was waiting on for a long time. Just write a little dummy HTTP server to push a file back to the other person. _______________________________________________ Jabberzilla mailing list Jabberzilla@mozdev.org http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla From stpeter at jabber.org Wed Mar 3 09:57:03 2004 From: stpeter at jabber.org (Peter Saint-Andre) Date: Wed Mar 3 11:07:31 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Jabberzilla status In-Reply-To: <40453963.1020006@cox.net> References: <4044F300.8020400@betterbilling.net> <40453963.1020006@cox.net> Message-ID: <20040303155703.GA4974@jabber.org> Hi Eric, > I am still alive in case anyone wondered. Long time no chat. :-) > Recently I started updating jabberzilla.mozdev.org to restart the > project in a new direction. At the time, I was in the mood to do some > work on the client (this is a couple of weeks ago). Of course, the > mozdev server was so damn slow that I quickly lost interest again. I'm > just sick of everything having to be so hard (it should not take 5 mins > to update an html file). It's kind of hard to get anything done when > the tools to do it don't work. Does a Mozilla-related project have to be hosted on mozdev.org? Why not host it on JabberStudio? > Here is what I have on that page: > > This project has the goal to integrate Jabber instant messaging into > the Mozilla Thunderbird mail client. The Jabber service would work much > like Thunderbird's native functions of mail and newsgroups. > > Jabberzilla has been around since 2000, but was never finished with > it's goal of becoming a stand-alone Jabber client. Now this project is > starting over completely with a new set of goals, and new code. > > > Hopefully that is a clear statement. This is totally different than any > other Jabber client than I know of. Jabberzilla would become an add-on > to Thunderbird to make IM functions appear to be "native" to the > application. The less IM-specific GUI elements, the better. That is > just my hope for a new Jabberzilla. Maybe that is the wrong approach to > take, but I think it could potentially be revolutionary. Sounds Chandler-esque: http://www.osafoundation.org/ Not saying that's good or bad, but I think it's probably good. > Here is a question I got today: > > Carl Tanner wrote: I chatted with Carl today as well. In part I pointed him to JEP-0124, which will enable applications to access Jabber/XMPP servers without using XML streams over port 5222: http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0124.html The is already one implementation, but it's proprietary: http://www.clientside.co.uk/ We'd need someone to develop on open-source connection manager (probably for the jabberd2 server), but it seems that this might be the way to go for Jabberzilla rather than maintaining an open TCP connection over port 5222. /psa From carl at betterbilling.net Wed Mar 3 21:05:51 2004 From: carl at betterbilling.net (Carl Tanner) Date: Wed Mar 3 23:16:22 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux Message-ID: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> If we want to JIM code, why doesn't it work on linux? It doesn't work for me, and I have seen similar post at http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/jim From emurphy79 at cox.net Thu Mar 4 15:22:41 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Thu Mar 4 16:33:08 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux In-Reply-To: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> References: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> Message-ID: <40479E21.2000609@cox.net> The TCP socket is broken. Carl Tanner wrote: > If we want to JIM code, why doesn't it work on linux? It doesn't work > for me, and I have seen similar post at > http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/jim > _______________________________________________ > Jabberzilla mailing list > Jabberzilla@mozdev.org > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > From prefiks at civ.pl Fri Mar 5 10:35:48 2004 From: prefiks at civ.pl (Pawel Chmielowski) Date: Fri Mar 5 17:32:57 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux In-Reply-To: <40479E21.2000609@cox.net> References: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> <40479E21.2000609@cox.net> Message-ID: <404849F4.1040601@civ.pl> Eric Murphy wrote: > The TCP socket is broken. > Actualy socket code is good (it works under FireFox 0.8 on Linux). It looks like problem in JS implementation. I define some additional methods in Element.prototype (addElement, addText, itp.). Those methods should be available in all instances of Element class. Unfortuantely .addMethod is *undefined* under 1.6. It works on 1.4 branch. PS. JIM now works on Windows? -- Pozdrawiam, Pawel Chmielowski From carl at betterbilling.net Fri Mar 5 15:36:51 2004 From: carl at betterbilling.net (Carl Tanner) Date: Fri Mar 5 17:47:23 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 In-Reply-To: <200403051203419.SM01040@mozdev.mozdev.org> References: <200403051203419.SM01040@mozdev.mozdev.org> Message-ID: <40490103.6010504@betterbilling.net> Is the broken socket JIM related, or is it specific to moz for linux? If we used JEP-0124 ( http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0124.html ) would that fix the problem? stpeter@jabber.org (JID stpeter@jabber.org) says that it will be finalized by the end of the month. jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: >Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: JIM doesn't work on linux (Eric Murphy) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > Re: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux > From: > Eric Murphy > Date: > Thu, 04 Mar 2004 15:22:41 -0600 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > The TCP socket is broken. > > Carl Tanner wrote: > >> If we want to JIM code, why doesn't it work on linux? It doesn't >> work for me, and I have seen similar post at >> http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/jim >> _______________________________________________ >> Jabberzilla mailing list >> Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > From stpeter at jabber.org Fri Mar 5 16:54:04 2004 From: stpeter at jabber.org (Peter Saint-Andre) Date: Fri Mar 5 18:04:34 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 In-Reply-To: <40490103.6010504@betterbilling.net> References: <200403051203419.SM01040@mozdev.mozdev.org> <40490103.6010504@betterbilling.net> Message-ID: <20040305225404.GB10525@jabber.org> On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:36:51PM -0700, Carl Tanner wrote: > Is the broken socket JIM related, or is it specific to moz for linux? > If we used JEP-0124 ( http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0124.html ) would > that fix the problem? stpeter@jabber.org (JID stpeter@jabber.org) says > that it will be finalized by the end of the month. I hope. :-) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre Jabber Software Foundation http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php From carl at betterbilling.net Sat Mar 6 10:13:10 2004 From: carl at betterbilling.net (Carl Tanner) Date: Sat Mar 6 12:23:52 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 5 In-Reply-To: <200403061201125.SM01040@mozdev.mozdev.org> References: <200403061201125.SM01040@mozdev.mozdev.org> Message-ID: <404A06A6.6080508@betterbilling.net> If we are going to use the JIM code, shouldn't it be used on all platforms? I don't seem to be able to log into jabber.org using JIM on linux. I installed JIM as root to firefox, and tried to use it from a user account. Here is what the XML console shows: Connected carlb stream:error> stream:stream> Disconnected jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: >Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: JIM doesn't work on linux (Pawel Chmielowski) > 2. Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 (Carl Tanner) > 3. Re: Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 (Peter Saint-Andre) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > Re: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux > From: > Pawel Chmielowski > Date: > Fri, 05 Mar 2004 10:35:48 +0100 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > Eric Murphy wrote: > >> The TCP socket is broken. >> > > Actualy socket code is good (it works under FireFox 0.8 on Linux). It > looks like problem in JS implementation. > > I define some additional methods in Element.prototype (addElement, > addText, itp.). Those methods should be available in all instances of > Element class. Unfortuantely .addMethod is > *undefined* under 1.6. It works on 1.4 branch. > > PS. > JIM now works on Windows? > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 > From: > Carl Tanner > Date: > Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:36:51 -0700 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > Is the broken socket JIM related, or is it specific to moz for linux? > If we used JEP-0124 ( http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0124.html ) would > that fix the problem? stpeter@jabber.org (JID stpeter@jabber.org) > says that it will be finalized by the end of the month. > > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: > >> Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: JIM doesn't work on linux (Eric Murphy) >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Subject: >> Re: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux >> From: >> Eric Murphy >> Date: >> Thu, 04 Mar 2004 15:22:41 -0600 >> To: >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> To: >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> >> The TCP socket is broken. >> >> Carl Tanner wrote: >> >>> If we want to JIM code, why doesn't it work on linux? It doesn't >>> work for me, and I have seen similar post at >>> http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/jim >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Jabberzilla mailing list >>> Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >>> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jabberzilla mailing list >> Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > Re: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 > From: > Peter Saint-Andre > Date: > Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:54:04 -0600 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > >On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:36:51PM -0700, Carl Tanner wrote: > > >>Is the broken socket JIM related, or is it specific to moz for linux? >>If we used JEP-0124 ( http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0124.html ) would >>that fix the problem? stpeter@jabber.org (JID stpeter@jabber.org) says >>that it will be finalized by the end of the month. >> >> > >I hope. :-) > >Peter > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > From jeremychone at hotmail.com Sat Mar 6 10:59:53 2004 From: jeremychone at hotmail.com (Jeremy Chone) Date: Sat Mar 6 14:10:32 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Questions about this project In-Reply-To: <404A06A6.6080508@betterbilling.net> Message-ID: Hi Eric & Everybody, First I am very glad that this project has been restarted. Thanks Eric! I am very interested to work on this project. I have been working on IM for quite a while and I am a little familiar with the Jabber server (I have my own server at home). I am a little familiar with XUL & JavaScript programming. I was also a little familiar with the first Jabberzilla and JIM code. Please, let me know how I can help. I have a couple of questions: Do we have a first requirement or functional spec document? Do we have a code based to start from? If yes, where is the latest code (CVS/HomePage)? Does the plan is to start from scratch or just re-factor some of the modules? How many developers are interested to participate so far (I can be counted as one)? Sorry if I missed anything from any previous discussion. Jeremy, From neil.marshall at sympatico.ca Sat Mar 6 15:12:23 2004 From: neil.marshall at sympatico.ca (Neil Marshall) Date: Sat Mar 6 15:25:30 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Questions about this project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <404A30A7.6050107@sympatico.ca> Jeremy Chone wrote: >Do we have a first requirement or functional spec document? > > I'd like to see that too. The jabberzilla.mozdev.org says there is one being worked on, but none of the links on the page work. I guess thats because of the mozdev problems that Eric mentioned earlier. Is there some more reliable place the code/info pages could be stored? Sourceforge or something? >Do we have a code based to start from? > > From what I understand there really isn't much code to start off with at the moment besides the old broken code, JIM, and Chatzilla. Eric will be able to give a definate answer though. >How many developers are interested to participate so far (I can be counted >as one)? > > I don't think you've missed much. I think the people wanting to help develop is around 3 or 4 (including you). From tamer23 at myrealbox.com Sun Mar 7 00:05:44 2004 From: tamer23 at myrealbox.com (Tamer Higazi) Date: Sat Mar 6 18:17:43 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Questions about this project In-Reply-To: <404A30A7.6050107@sympatico.ca> References: <404A30A7.6050107@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <404A5948.2070000@myrealbox.com> Sourceforge is a good place because they offer good mirror server for downloading files. Tamer Neil Marshall schrieb: > Jeremy Chone wrote: > >> Do we have a first requirement or functional spec document? >> >> > I'd like to see that too. The jabberzilla.mozdev.org says there is > one being worked on, but none of the links on the page work. I guess > thats because of the mozdev problems that Eric mentioned earlier. Is > there some more reliable place the code/info pages could be stored? > Sourceforge or something? > >> Do we have a code based to start from? >> >> > From what I understand there really isn't much code to start off with > at the moment besides the old broken code, JIM, and Chatzilla. Eric > will be able to give a definate answer though. > >> How many developers are interested to participate so far (I can be >> counted >> as one)? >> > I don't think you've missed much. I think the people wanting to help > develop is around 3 or 4 (including you). > > _______________________________________________ > Jabberzilla mailing list > Jabberzilla@mozdev.org > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > From prefiks at civ.pl Mon Mar 8 08:04:43 2004 From: prefiks at civ.pl (Pawel Chmielowski) Date: Mon Mar 8 02:15:32 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux In-Reply-To: <404849F4.1040601@civ.pl> References: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> <40479E21.2000609@cox.net> <404849F4.1040601@civ.pl> Message-ID: <404C1B0B.3070601@civ.pl> It seems that problems is caused by using shared document object between different windows (bug in mozilla garbage collector?). Attached patch should solve this issue. -- Pozdrawiam, Pawel Chmielowski -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: xdb.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1304 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mozdev.org/pipermail/jabberzilla/attachments/20040308/607f6c19/xdb.bin From mxn at zoomtown.com Thu Mar 11 22:28:52 2004 From: mxn at zoomtown.com (Minh Nguyen) Date: Thu Mar 11 22:39:30 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Volunteering to Help Message-ID: <40512E74.1030402@zoomtown.com> Hi, I was involved with the Jim project when it was active. I'd like to help out in any way I can. I know XUL, JS, and RDF, and I'm familiar with the file structure that Jim used (I tried to skin Jim... what a hassle). Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with the whole implementation of sockets etc. But I do have plenty of UI ideas. I've filed RFEs on Jim for some of those ideas. And I can help with skinning to themes like Luna and Luna Blue. I've also been thinking of ways to integrate a Jabber client into Thunderbird for a long time now. Imho, however, we should make not only an extension, but also a standalone client, because a standalone client would have much simpler UI - one of the main reasons Firefox and Thunderbird were started. The extension and standalone clients should probably have different names, to avoid confusion between the two. Btw, there didn't seem to be any real problems when Netscape (which integrated AIM/ICQ into Messenger) was being actively promoted. So I'm not sure that Jabberzilla, a much less promoted program, would have any problems with viruses and trojans and such. Someone asked in a previous thread about another place to host the project. Seeing as JabberStudio already being used for a large number of Jabber-related projects, you could host the project there. If not, you could at least have this project listed there as an external project. I'm excited to see that there's been some activity here lately, and I sincerely hope that this project will soon take off. -- *Minh Nguyen >* AIM SN: trycom2000 ; Jabber ID: mxn@myjabber.net ; Website URL: http://mxn.f2o.org/ *New!* -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mxn.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 229 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mozdev.org/pipermail/jabberzilla/attachments/20040311/4bd54131/mxn.vcf From emurphy79 at cox.net Sun Mar 14 23:08:30 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Mon Mar 15 00:19:02 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Update Message-ID: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> I have submitted a request for a Jabberzilla project to be setup at JabberStudio.org. We might just want to use their CVS instead of doing a major brain transplant over there with mail list and web pages. I don't know. MozDev has been so slow lately it makes things frustrating. I do like the fact that MozDev has bugzilla, JabberStudio does not. Eric From emurphy79 at cox.net Sun Mar 14 23:09:51 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Mon Mar 15 00:20:27 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] JIM doesn't work on linux In-Reply-To: <404C1B0B.3070601@civ.pl> References: <4046AB1F.5030406@betterbilling.net> <40479E21.2000609@cox.net> <404849F4.1040601@civ.pl> <404C1B0B.3070601@civ.pl> Message-ID: <40553A9F.4090402@cox.net> Thanks Pawel. Eric Pawel Chmielowski wrote: > It seems that problems is caused by using shared document object > between different windows (bug in mozilla garbage collector?). > Attached patch should solve this issue. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Index: content/scripts/xml/xmldombuilder.js >=================================================================== >--- content/scripts/xml/xmldombuilder.js (revision 109) >+++ content/scripts/xml/xmldombuilder.js (working copy) >@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ > */ > ML.load("xml/xmldomutils.js"); > >-Element.prototype.addElement = function() >+Document.prototype.addElement = Element.prototype.addElement = function() > { > var tag, i; > var xmlns; >@@ -127,11 +127,11 @@ > var idx, tag, doc; > > if (type == 0 || type == 1 || type == 2) { >- tag = this.doc.createElementNS(arguments[1], arguments[2]); >+ tag = document.createElementNS(arguments[1], arguments[2]); > idx = 3; > tag.type = type; > } else { >- tag = this.doc.createElementNS(arguments[0], arguments[1]); >+ tag = document.createElementNS(arguments[0], arguments[1]); > idx = 2; > tag.type = 0; > } >@@ -148,12 +148,11 @@ > arguments[idx], arguments[idx+1]); > else > tag.setAttribute(arguments[idx], arguments[idx+1]); >- > return tag; > }, > > createText: function(value) > { >- return this.doc.createTextNode(value); >+ return document.createTextNode(value); > } > } > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > From emurphy79 at cox.net Sun Mar 14 23:42:03 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Mon Mar 15 00:52:40 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Questions about this project In-Reply-To: <404A30A7.6050107@sympatico.ca> References: <404A30A7.6050107@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <4055422B.6060508@cox.net> http://jabberzilla.mozdev.org/requirements.html Just a start on what features should be supported. Eric Neil Marshall wrote: > Jeremy Chone wrote: > >> Do we have a first requirement or functional spec document? >> >> > I'd like to see that too. The jabberzilla.mozdev.org says there is > one being worked on, but none of the links on the page work. I guess > thats because of the mozdev problems that Eric mentioned earlier. Is > there some more reliable place the code/info pages could be stored? > Sourceforge or something? > >> Do we have a code based to start from? >> >> > From what I understand there really isn't much code to start off with > at the moment besides the old broken code, JIM, and Chatzilla. Eric > will be able to give a definate answer though. > >> How many developers are interested to participate so far (I can be >> counted >> as one)? >> > I don't think you've missed much. I think the people wanting to help > develop is around 3 or 4 (including you). > > _______________________________________________ > Jabberzilla mailing list > Jabberzilla@mozdev.org > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > From stpeter at jabber.org Tue Mar 16 15:47:40 2004 From: stpeter at jabber.org (Peter Saint-Andre) Date: Tue Mar 16 16:58:38 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Update In-Reply-To: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> Message-ID: <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 11:08:30PM -0600, Eric Murphy wrote: > I have submitted a request for a Jabberzilla project to be setup at > JabberStudio.org. Approved: http://www.jabberstudio.org/projects/jabberzilla/project/view.php /psa From mozilla at jedbrown.net Wed Mar 17 12:07:36 2004 From: mozilla at jedbrown.net (Jed) Date: Wed Mar 17 13:18:45 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Great! Message-ID: <405893E8.6030003@jedbrown.net> Happened on by the page today, and saw Jaberzilla is being revived!! Awesome! Expecially that it will be integrated with Thunderbird (and I assume not to hard to port it to Firefox). My coding skillz are crap, but I'm learning (thanks to quicknote). Would love to help out anyway possible. -Jed ===o===o==== Why is it called COMMON sense when so few people have it? From neil.marshall at sympatico.ca Sun Mar 28 13:51:58 2004 From: neil.marshall at sympatico.ca (Neil Marshall) Date: Sun Mar 28 14:05:52 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Update In-Reply-To: <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> Message-ID: <40671ECE.4090207@sympatico.ca> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >Approved: > >http://www.jabberstudio.org/projects/jabberzilla/project/view.php > > > Now that it has been aproved has anyone started on any work? Can someone who knows how to use CVS properly write up a document on how to Install, download, setup the JabberZilla source code so that people can work on it? And also, how to submit patches to the project. Will we be using patch maker? Are there any C++ portions of code? From carl at betterbilling.net Mon Mar 29 20:13:55 2004 From: carl at betterbilling.net (Carl Tanner) Date: Mon Mar 29 22:25:53 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: <200403291708.i2TH7v61063864@localhost.mozdev.org> References: <200403291708.i2TH7v61063864@localhost.mozdev.org> Message-ID: <4068E5F3.1080103@betterbilling.net> I looked earlier today and I did not see files listed. Would Marc or someone else upload the files? jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: >Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Update (Neil Marshall) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > Re: [Jabberzilla] Update > From: > Neil Marshall > Date: > Sun, 28 Mar 2004 13:51:58 -0500 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> Approved: >> >> http://www.jabberstudio.org/projects/jabberzilla/project/view.php >> >> >> > Now that it has been aproved has anyone started on any work? > > Can someone who knows how to use CVS properly write up a document on > how to Install, download, setup the JabberZilla source code so that > people can work on it? And also, how to submit patches to the project. > > Will we be using patch maker? Are there any C++ portions of code? > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > From emurphy79 at cox.net Mon Mar 29 21:31:06 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Mon Mar 29 22:43:10 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Update Message-ID: <4068E9FA.7070004@cox.net> Hey All, I have been busy lately, sorry things are getting off track again. If you would like access to Jabberzilla CVS and mail list administration, let me know. I'm obviously doing a very poor job on resurrecting this project. I just really have a hard time working a lot on the computer at home, after programming all day at work. I'd rather be doing something beside being on the computer programming 99% of the time. Please, someone take this project over from me. I have the best of intentions, and would still like to help when I have the energy to do so. Hopefully there is someone out there who has the energy and skill to make Jabberzilla live again. Eric From carl at betterbilling.net Tue Mar 30 11:26:25 2004 From: carl at betterbilling.net (Carl Tanner) Date: Tue Mar 30 13:38:28 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13 In-Reply-To: <200403301703.i2UH3761070761@localhost.mozdev.org> References: <200403301703.i2UH3761070761@localhost.mozdev.org> Message-ID: <4069BBD1.10607@betterbilling.net> If no one objects, I will volunteer for the day-to-day stuff of admin. jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: >Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 12 (Carl Tanner) > 2. Update (Eric Murphy) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [Jabberzilla] Re: Jabberzilla Digest, Vol 4, Issue 12 > From: > Carl Tanner > Date: > Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:13:55 -0700 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > I looked earlier today and I did not see files listed. Would Marc or > someone else upload the files? > > jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org wrote: > >> Send Jabberzilla mailing list submissions to >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> jabberzilla-request@mozdev.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> jabberzilla-owner@mozdev.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Jabberzilla digest..." >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Update (Neil Marshall) >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Subject: >> Re: [Jabberzilla] Update >> From: >> Neil Marshall >> Date: >> Sun, 28 Mar 2004 13:51:58 -0500 >> To: >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> To: >> jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> >> >> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> >>> Approved: >>> >>> http://www.jabberstudio.org/projects/jabberzilla/project/view.php >>> >>> >>> >> Now that it has been aproved has anyone started on any work? >> >> Can someone who knows how to use CVS properly write up a document on >> how to Install, download, setup the JabberZilla source code so that >> people can work on it? And also, how to submit patches to the project. >> >> Will we be using patch maker? Are there any C++ portions of code? >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jabberzilla mailing list >> Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [Jabberzilla] Update > From: > Eric Murphy > Date: > Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:31:06 -0600 > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > To: > jabberzilla@mozdev.org > > > Hey All, > > I have been busy lately, sorry things are getting off track again. > > If you would like access to Jabberzilla CVS and mail list > administration, let me know. I'm obviously doing a very poor job on > resurrecting this project. I just really have a hard time working a > lot on the computer at home, after programming all day at work. I'd > rather be doing something beside being on the computer programming 99% > of the time. > > Please, someone take this project over from me. I have the best of > intentions, and would still like to help when I have the energy to do > so. Hopefully there is someone out there who has the energy and skill > to make Jabberzilla live again. > > Eric > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Jabberzilla mailing list >Jabberzilla@mozdev.org >http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > > From justin at openaether.org Tue Mar 30 14:24:50 2004 From: justin at openaether.org (Justin Kirby) Date: Tue Mar 30 14:36:32 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... Message-ID: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> I was just pointed to the recent activity here and have gone through the archives. I noticed Eric's resignation (I know how it is and can fully sympathize) So without further delay I would like to put forth a consideration of the *working* code that I have done. http://www.openaether.org Pros: - it works now. - it works everywhere (win32, linux, and even osX) - its fast not small Cons: - it has a lot of outside dependencies * apr * xerces-c * boost (only if you are building from source) - there is no foss UI It is 99.9% c++ which is a good or bad thing depending on your point of view. The core libs are not dependent on mozilla and can be used outside of the xul/xpcom env. The biggest downside is the dependency on apr. That was a horrible decision on my part. I would love to move it to an nspr dependency. There is no cohesive FOSS UI as of yet. The xul is scattered and in partially working states, but the XPCOM c++ code is all there and working beautifully. There are a couple private/closed implementations in xul that use this, I am working on opening one of those up to the FOSS world. So, I am not proposing that I take over this project. But, I am proposing that whoever does take over this project (which I think someone should) considers using OpenAether as a base. Given all the problems with implementing a jabber client in 100% xul/js it seems reasonable to dive into the c/c++ world. Justin From emurphy79 at cox.net Tue Mar 30 18:37:11 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Tue Mar 30 19:49:18 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> Message-ID: <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> Justin thanks for your feedback. I do not have the time or energy right now to look over the existing code of your project. It sounds interesting. Personally, I think that Jabberzilla should be 100% Mozilla based. There is no good reason for it to not be since Mozilla provides everything in its framework to do a Jabber client. I don't know if people are willing to help port Justin's code to NSPR from APR, and do other porting work. Also, in the context of the Mozilla framework, C++ is just unnecessary because it has full XPCOM capabilities, and doesn't have to be compiled for different platforms. There are no technical problems with 100% XUL/JavaScript, just the problems of man-hours to do the job and skilled developers. It's all about that people are going to find fun to work on, and the technical skills of the developers. What do people want to do with this project? Who is out there seriously interested in helping? Eric Justin Kirby wrote: > I was just pointed to the recent activity here and have gone through > the archives. I noticed Eric's resignation (I know how it is and can > fully sympathize) > > So without further delay I would like to put forth a consideration of > the *working* code that I have done. http://www.openaether.org > > Pros: > - it works now. > - it works everywhere (win32, linux, and even osX) > - its fast not small > > Cons: > - it has a lot of outside dependencies > * apr > * xerces-c > * boost (only if you are building from source) > - there is no foss UI > > It is 99.9% c++ which is a good or bad thing depending on your point > of view. The core libs are not dependent on mozilla and can be used > outside of the xul/xpcom env. > > The biggest downside is the dependency on apr. That was a horrible > decision on my part. I would love to move it to an nspr dependency. > > There is no cohesive FOSS UI as of yet. The xul is scattered and in > partially working states, but the XPCOM c++ code is all there and > working beautifully. There are a couple private/closed implementations > in xul that use this, I am working on opening one of those up to the > FOSS world. > > So, I am not proposing that I take over this project. But, I am > proposing that whoever does take over this project (which I think > someone should) considers using OpenAether as a base. > > Given all the problems with implementing a jabber client in 100% > xul/js it seems reasonable to dive into the c/c++ world. > > > Justin > _______________________________________________ > Jabberzilla mailing list > Jabberzilla@mozdev.org > http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/jabberzilla > From neil.marshall at sympatico.ca Tue Mar 30 20:44:03 2004 From: neil.marshall at sympatico.ca (Neil Marshall) Date: Tue Mar 30 20:57:59 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> Message-ID: <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> Eric Murphy wrote: > There are no technical problems with 100% XUL/JavaScript, just the > problems of man-hours to do the job and skilled developers. > > It's all about that people are going to find fun to work on, and the > technical skills of the developers. What do people want to do with > this project? Who is out there seriously interested in helping? I say 100% XUL/JavaScript. It lowers the bar for people interested in working on it. From justin at openaether.org Wed Mar 31 01:52:21 2004 From: justin at openaether.org (Justin Kirby) Date: Wed Mar 31 02:03:58 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> Neil Marshall wrote: > Eric Murphy wrote: > >> There are no technical problems with 100% XUL/JavaScript, just the >> problems of man-hours to do the job and skilled developers. man-hours is a big thing. volunteers are attracted by something that is working. very very few ppl will jump into a project just getting off the ground. while there may not be s/technical/implementation/ problems with 100% xul/js, there are performance issues to take into consideration. The calendar project suffers from this. Most of the event callbacks are implemented in JS. This causes *huge* delays when loading large calendars. Some of the issues have been or will be addressed by moving that JS code into c++ > I say 100% XUL/JavaScript. It lowers the bar for people interested in > working on it. That is my point in suggesting a *working* jabber library. One that has xpcom components available now. Thats a pretty low bar ;) I do not mean to sound like I am pushing my code. Use jso, smack, psi's iris, or jabberoo (iirc jabberoo has xpcom wrapper too). There are tons of available working jabber libraries out there. Don't reinvent the wheel for the sake of some ideal. Most of the useful mozilla applications are mainly implemented in c++. Chatzilla is the only exception that I am aware of. Basically, the faster a demonstrable application is out there and working, the faster you get developers. While this is not a guarantee to attract people, reinventing the wheel isn't going to help either. Justin From GuruJ at mbox.com.au Wed Mar 31 21:46:55 2004 From: GuruJ at mbox.com.au (GuruJ) Date: Wed Mar 31 06:57:43 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> Message-ID: <406AAFAF.8030905@mbox.com.au> Okay, here's my 2 cents: Justin Kirby wrote: > while there may not be s/technical/implementation/ problems with 100% > xul/js, there are performance issues to take into consideration. The > calendar project suffers from this. Most of the event callbacks are > implemented in JS. This causes *huge* delays when loading large > calendars. Some of the issues have been or will be addressed by moving > that JS code into c++ I feel that worrying about performance at this stage is a 'premature optimization'. To attract developers, IMHO, the *key* is making sure that it is easy to get a copy of the program to play around. That means not downloading 5 different programs and compiling from source. If it is possible to bundle all dependencies in, say, 1-4 XPIs, then great. Anything more complicated than that, I suspect, is a no go. Given that the critical problem in the past has been the broken socket code, we need to get that working first. Even more than that, we should hide the ugliness of XPCOM socket interfacing as *far* as possible from the average developer. In other words, I'm proposing that we use (or adapt) the network library of JSLib (http://jslib.mozdev.org). I'm sure that Pete Collins would love people to contribute any improvements that are needed. In addition, the socket code appears to be written so that you can substitute your own XPCOM class later on if you need greater performance. > Basically, the faster a demonstrable application is out there and > working, the faster you get developers. While this is not a guarantee to > attract people, reinventing the wheel isn't going to help either. No, but trying to re-use a wheel that won't fit the axle isn't going to help as well. I suppose the question is, are we aiming for an implementation that fits with the broader Mozilla strategy (ie. generalized, componentized and reuseable), or just a "Jabber app" which happens to use an XUL framework? (To give an idea where I'm coming from, although I love the XMPP spec, it's overkill for a lot of the applications that I want to write. All I really want to do is pass XML messages between programs, not worry about rosters or presence or any of those things. Therefore, although I see Jabberzilla as an important step, I want XMPP to expand beyond 'just' an IM protocol, and particularly if we build a library for Mozilla, I'd love it to be capable of scaling to a level where it's easily re-worked to do things like inter-process messaging between IM<->mail<->browsing<->calendar. This is not a slight on Justin's work, or on any other Jabber library, but I just tend to find most implementations too restrictive.) -- GuruJ. From justin at openaether.org Wed Mar 31 08:43:00 2004 From: justin at openaether.org (Justin Kirby) Date: Wed Mar 31 08:54:48 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <406AAFAF.8030905@mbox.com.au> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> <406AAFAF.8030905@mbox.com.au> Message-ID: <406ACAE4.7060800@openaether.org> Ok, there seems to be a consensus here about pure xul/js application. Fair enough and I will drop the issue. So the rest is just clarification of some minor points, nothing to do with anything else, i.e. off topic from here on. > > I feel that worrying about performance at this stage is a 'premature > optimization'. To attract developers, IMHO, the *key* is making sure > that it is easy to get a copy of the program to play around. That means > not downloading 5 different programs and compiling from source. I have been working on porting from apr to nspr for a week or so. When thats done, the only non-moz dependency will be xerces-c (for binaries). > > If it is possible to bundle all dependencies in, say, 1-4 XPIs, then > great. Anything more complicated than that, I suspect, is a no go. I have it bundled into one xpi. > No, but trying to re-use a wheel that won't fit the axle isn't going to > help as well. Maybe you could help clarify this for me. How does an XPCOM component, and a jar package which has xbl bindings not fit onto the mozilla axle? (note: I do not mean that as sarcasm, but I am interested as to why you think it doesn't fit) > I suppose the question is, are we aiming for an > implementation that fits with the broader Mozilla strategy (ie. > generalized, componentized and reuseable), or just a "Jabber app" which > happens to use an XUL framework? I agree with the 'not just another IM'. There are countless possibilities with integrating jabber capabilities into mozilla. It is exciting to think about. I would like to point out that just because an XPCOM lib is written in c++ does not mean it has fallen out of the mozilla strategy. The xpoa component is nothing more than an implementation of the jabber protocol, so there is no reason that it should be constrained to yet another client. In fact the primary goal of it's design is to allow for more interesting uses. > > This is not a slight on Justin's work, or on any other Jabber library, > but I just tend to find most implementations too restrictive.) No slight taken :) There are two philosophies in jabber library implementations (as far as I can see) - Designed for a very specific use, usually with a specific client - Designed for general use and integration into any app that wants to add whatever jabber features. Most libs are in the first category. There are only two libraries that I am aware of which fall into the second. OpenAether and JSO. PSI is working on moving Iris out into this design too, but right now it is still a client only for psi. This is all probably due to design philosophy differences. I have always viewed the pure xul/js as a quick prototyping tool to make sure your idea is sane. Once that is done, you relegate the js to nothing more than glue. Meaning most of the logic code is move into c++ and the UI is in XUL xml, js is just the native bridge between the two. Where apparently the consensus here is that xul/js is the end, not the means. So, with that out of the way: I obviously have extensive experience playing with the jabber protocol and implementing it (I have worked on more than just OA). So feel free to ping me on any design or protocol questions you have. Do try not to go too far outside the xmpp protocol, the point of xmpp is interoperability after all. Justin From garym at canada.com Wed Mar 31 17:38:05 2004 From: garym at canada.com (Gary Lawrence Murphy) Date: Wed Mar 31 17:49:45 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> Message-ID: I've been doing some pondering lately on the failure of the current crop of "social networking" portals, and I've concluded that it's inside out, that it's not the endpoints who should own the network topology but the edges that join them, the content. this is a half baked idea, so bear with me ;) the buddylist should belong not to individual people, but to individual artifacts online, and the easiest way to do that is to embed the FOAF information into a webpage like the classical CC list of the old pre-paperless office. So here's the interface: * the page contains the CC list of "people attached to this web resource" * XPI is sensitive to this list, picks it up and finds IM handles (thus protecting personal privacy) * Jabberzilla, instead of showing me /my/ buddy list, shows me the current online status of /everyone attached to this resource/ In business situations, this is an obvious match. For other sorts of contact, maybe the FOAF would be dynamically generated from the "portal members last reading this page" or somesuch, it doesn't matter, it's just a FOAF list attached (via meta alt link?) -- Jabberzilla doesn't care how the list is generated, it's just a link to follow and interpret Jabberzilla then displays a compact list of who's who in this web resource's world, so if you needed to talk to someone about it, voila, there it is. it's like a live CC-list :) Microsoft announced it is obsessed with dating sites and people trading photographs; my guess is they plan to hash-id actual files and run a central registry that will link IM handles to the hash-id, bla bla bla all centralized, all locked down, and all useless when their NT server goes down :) But live CC ... it's decentralized, open standard, and _requires_ Mozilla to make it fly (ok, you could probably code an MSIE widget thingy to do the same, but why on earth would you encourage people to use MSIE?) I think this would be a killer app for Mozilla, a killer app for Jabberzilla, a killer app for jabber in general, we'll all be instantly rich and famous (or at least famous) and social networking software will start performing a /useful/ function. So ... what say the preachers? * Is this possible? How soon? * Anyone have the skills/resources to effect it? * Am I stark raving bonkers even suggesting such a thing? -- Gary Lawrence Murphy www.teledyn.com/mt - www.teledyn.com - sbp.teledyn.com You don't play what you know; you play what you hear. From neil.marshall at sympatico.ca Wed Mar 31 18:00:10 2004 From: neil.marshall at sympatico.ca (Neil Marshall) Date: Wed Mar 31 18:14:04 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] Suggestion... In-Reply-To: <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> References: <4069C982.90603@openaether.org> <406A12B7.9020803@cox.net> <406A2263.8000907@sympatico.ca> <406A6AA5.3060006@openaether.org> Message-ID: <406B4D7A.6080306@sympatico.ca> Justin Kirby wrote: > > while there may not be s/technical/implementation/ problems with 100% > xul/js, there are performance issues to take into consideration. The > calendar project suffers from this. Most of the event callbacks are > implemented in JS. This causes *huge* delays when loading large > calendars. Some of the issues have been or will be addressed by moving > that JS code into c++ Does anyone forsee any large pieces of data that Jabberzilla would be loading that would cause a slowdown like this? > There are tons of available working jabber libraries out there. Don't > reinvent the wheel for the sake of some ideal. Most of the useful > mozilla applications are mainly implemented in c++. Chatzilla is the > only exception that I am aware of. > Chatzilla is the exception and something like chatzilla is what we're trying to create here... :) I don't really know what I'm trying to say here but could we develop the back end and front ends at the same time using this library? I'm thinking of an abstraction layer inbetween so that the networking layer can be swapped out while keeping the same UI. From mxn at zoomtown.com Wed Mar 31 21:30:04 2004 From: mxn at zoomtown.com (Minh Nguyen) Date: Wed Mar 31 21:42:08 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app In-Reply-To: References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> Message-ID: <406B7EAC.1030008@zoomtown.com> I think what you're describing seems very much like Lluna ( http://www.lluna.de/ ), but please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you. Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote: >I've been doing some pondering lately on the failure of the current >crop of "social networking" portals, and I've concluded that it's >inside out, that it's not the endpoints who should own the network >topology but the edges that join them, the content. > >this is a half baked idea, so bear with me ;) > >the buddylist should belong not to individual people, but to individual >artifacts online, and the easiest way to do that is to embed the >FOAF information into a webpage like the classical CC list of the old >pre-paperless office. > >So here's the interface: > >* the page contains the CC list of "people attached to this web resource" > >* XPI is sensitive to this list, picks it up and finds IM handles (thus > protecting personal privacy) > >* Jabberzilla, instead of showing me /my/ buddy list, shows me the > current online status of /everyone attached to this resource/ > >In business situations, this is an obvious match. For other sorts of >contact, maybe the FOAF would be dynamically generated from the "portal >members last reading this page" or somesuch, it doesn't matter, it's just >a FOAF list attached (via meta alt link?) -- Jabberzilla doesn't care >how the list is generated, it's just a link to follow and interpret > >Jabberzilla then displays a compact list of who's who in this web resource's >world, so if you needed to talk to someone about it, voila, there it is. > >it's like a live CC-list :) > >Microsoft announced it is obsessed with dating sites and people trading >photographs; my guess is they plan to hash-id actual files and run a >central registry that will link IM handles to the hash-id, bla bla bla >all centralized, all locked down, and all useless when their NT server >goes down :) > >But live CC ... it's decentralized, open standard, and _requires_ >Mozilla to make it fly (ok, you could probably code an MSIE widget >thingy to do the same, but why on earth would you encourage people to >use MSIE?) > >I think this would be a killer app for Mozilla, a killer app for >Jabberzilla, a killer app for jabber in general, we'll all be instantly >rich and famous (or at least famous) and social networking software will >start performing a /useful/ function. > >So ... what say the preachers? > >* Is this possible? How soon? >* Anyone have the skills/resources to effect it? >* Am I stark raving bonkers even suggesting such a thing? > > -- Minh Nguyen AIM: trycom2000; Jabber: mxn@myjabber.net; Blog: http://mxn.f2o.org/ From dkap+jabberzilla at haven.org Wed Mar 31 22:21:48 2004 From: dkap+jabberzilla at haven.org (A Page in the Life of ...) Date: Wed Mar 31 22:33:49 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app In-Reply-To: (message from Gary Lawrence Murphy on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 17:38:05 -0500) Message-ID: <200404010321.WAA25376@opal.haven.org> With all due respect, it sounds like you are re-inventing IRC as it originally was. Or perhaps a cross between IRC and Zephyr. Not that that is a bad thing, necessarily, but ask the developers of each why they didn't scale well. -dkap From emurphy79 at cox.net Wed Mar 31 21:27:29 2004 From: emurphy79 at cox.net (Eric Murphy) Date: Wed Mar 31 22:38:40 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app In-Reply-To: <406B7EAC.1030008@zoomtown.com> References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> <406B7EAC.1030008@zoomtown.com> Message-ID: <406B8C21.6040602@cox.net> Integrating Jabber into Mozilla can bring about an easy to develop for vehicle for making applications such as this. Over the past few years I started playing with this concept with the whiteboard, and a streaming Slashdot-like session with instant updates to the web page when people post a message. The impression I have received is that people just didn't give a hoot, not yet anyway. Maybe the time has come. I see 2 different ways of Jabberzilla succeeding. 1. It's integrated with Thunderbird offering the same level of capability/usability as e-mail and newsgroup. Lots of possibilities here. This is a recent idea that I have come up with now that I use Thunderbird. 2. It's used as a framework for Jabber-based web applications, making the Mozilla browser a client with a lot of offer. Doing stuff like LLuna would be a piece of cake. Whiteboard communications was easy. Lots of possibilities here also. In my opinion, Jabberzilla will NOT succeed in having a lot of users being yet another regular Jabber client. That is one reason why my drive to work on this project has been rather poor. I think that #1 offers more potential. However, it would not take much work to do both #2 when #1 is well under way. BTW, I am glad people are listening out there. Please feel free to chime in on where Jabberzilla should go. Eric Minh Nguyen wrote: > I think what you're describing seems very much like Lluna ( > http://www.lluna.de/ ), but please correct me if I'm misunderstanding > you. > > > Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote: > >> I've been doing some pondering lately on the failure of the current >> crop of "social networking" portals, and I've concluded that it's >> inside out, that it's not the endpoints who should own the network >> topology but the edges that join them, the content. >> >> this is a half baked idea, so bear with me ;) >> >> the buddylist should belong not to individual people, but to individual >> artifacts online, and the easiest way to do that is to embed the >> FOAF information into a webpage like the classical CC list of the old >> pre-paperless office. >> >> So here's the interface: >> >> * the page contains the CC list of "people attached to this web >> resource" >> >> * XPI is sensitive to this list, picks it up and finds IM handles (thus >> protecting personal privacy) >> >> * Jabberzilla, instead of showing me /my/ buddy list, shows me the >> current online status of /everyone attached to this resource/ >> >> In business situations, this is an obvious match. For other sorts of >> contact, maybe the FOAF would be dynamically generated from the "portal >> members last reading this page" or somesuch, it doesn't matter, it's >> just >> a FOAF list attached (via meta alt link?) -- Jabberzilla doesn't care >> how the list is generated, it's just a link to follow and interpret >> >> Jabberzilla then displays a compact list of who's who in this web >> resource's >> world, so if you needed to talk to someone about it, voila, there it is. >> >> it's like a live CC-list :) >> >> Microsoft announced it is obsessed with dating sites and people trading >> photographs; my guess is they plan to hash-id actual files and run a >> central registry that will link IM handles to the hash-id, bla bla bla >> all centralized, all locked down, and all useless when their NT server >> goes down :) >> >> But live CC ... it's decentralized, open standard, and _requires_ >> Mozilla to make it fly (ok, you could probably code an MSIE widget >> thingy to do the same, but why on earth would you encourage people to >> use MSIE?) >> >> I think this would be a killer app for Mozilla, a killer app for >> Jabberzilla, a killer app for jabber in general, we'll all be instantly >> rich and famous (or at least famous) and social networking software will >> start performing a /useful/ function. >> >> So ... what say the preachers? >> >> * Is this possible? How soon? >> * Anyone have the skills/resources to effect it? >> * Am I stark raving bonkers even suggesting such a thing? >> >> From garym at canada.com Wed Mar 31 23:26:14 2004 From: garym at canada.com (Gary Lawrence Murphy) Date: Wed Mar 31 23:37:50 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app References: <40553A4E.5020709@cox.net> <20040316214740.GA14594@jabber.org> <406B7EAC.1030008@zoomtown.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "M" == Minh Nguyen writes: M> I think what you're describing seems very much like Lluna ( M> http://www.lluna.de/ ), but please correct me if I'm M> misunderstanding you. Kinda, but so far as I can tell, lluna is similar mostly just in the respect that it can tell you who is currently hanging about a page, which may have a use (I can't think of any, but I'm basically anti-social anyway ;) The use I have in mind is more like the traditional CC list, a list of people associated to a particular URL, which could be the authors, it could be the people who must review it, it could be the last 10 people who read it. For example, consider court documents; I have witnessed court officers being asked for files and then they run around the back office asking other court officers, seeking anyone thought to have had previous and especially recent contact with a file -- with this system, it would be there in the live-CC generated by access. This list could be public, or it could be private, invisible to anyone who is not on the list -- unlike current artificial social network systems, we can allow this to transactional, dependent not just on who you are, but also on what it is you are looking at. Or consider a screenplay that has the producers, the author, the actors and the director all on the CC list and someone reading it wants to make a change; they can schedule a meeting, but perhaps everyoen involved is already there online right now -- at least they know who they must contact, and Jabber gives them a bonus of a method for instant contact. The other difference from lluna is obvious: Instead of cluttering the webpage with cute icons, we just want some Mozilla frame chicklets that show the status of the CC-list handles. No intrusive thought-bubbles, no dancing penguins, no tight low-cut T-shirt with big (ahem) sleeves ;) -- Gary Lawrence Murphy www.teledyn.com/mt - www.teledyn.com - sbp.teledyn.com You don't play what you know; you play what you hear. From garym at canada.com Wed Mar 31 23:32:17 2004 From: garym at canada.com (Gary Lawrence Murphy) Date: Wed Mar 31 23:43:58 2004 Subject: [Jabberzilla] the killer jabberzilla app References: <200404010321.WAA25376@opal.haven.org> Message-ID: >>>>> "A" == A Page in the Life of writes: A> With all due respect, it sounds like you are re-inventing IRC A> as it originally was. Or perhaps a cross between IRC and A> Zephyr. With all due respect, this is nothing at all like IRC -- try having a business meeting in IRC ;) Ok, it's like having your own IRC server, but how much fun is that? A> Not that that is a bad thing, necessarily, but ask the A> developers of each why they didn't scale well. Ah, there's the magic: Who said it has to scale? ... Read Clay Shirky's latest: http://www.shirky.com/writings/situated_software.html ... when was the last time you held a code review with 10,000 people present? What good is a writer's workshop with 200 people? What sort of legal brief would have an audience of more than 20 people? if anything, yes, it could probably be done embedding IRC into mozilla, but it's not really the chat itself I want to see (most often it's empty) but the /presence/ _and_ the full CC-list, present or not. Consider the number of people on the typical office-document CC list, at most a dozen, a perfectly manageable number for IM chat, and I don't need the expense of running my own IRC server because Jabber is plug and play running on any store-bought Linux box. -- Gary Lawrence Murphy www.teledyn.com/mt - www.teledyn.com - sbp.teledyn.com You don't play what you know; you play what you hear.