XMPP XEP-0085 Inactivity States

I'm in the process of setting up some accounts at LibraryH3lp and I'd really love to let our users (myself included) use Digsby to participate in the queues.  However, according to the LibraryH3lp site (http://code.google.com/p/libraryh3lp/wi … berClients) Disgby is not a working client because of its inability to report inactive state changes according to XEP-0085 - http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0085.html.

Is this true, and if so, is this something that Digsby could be changed to implement.  Sadly, three of the four of us who plan to use LibraryH3lp later this summer are all Digsby users while the fourth is a Pidgin user.

Specifically about xep-0085, it is most likely that the only change really needed for Digsby to work fine with LibraryH3lp routing is to implement gone status (<gone/>) on window close. 

And just to update this thread a little bit, the LibraryH3lp documentation is getting migrated around a bit.  The new version of the old wiki page is:

http://libraryh3lp.com/docs/non-suitable-clients.html

Last edited by psessoms (2009-06-22 14:41:44)

sorry I didn't see this thread earlier.  I've now implemented "gone".  re: XEP-0085, I'm not going to claim perfect compliance, so YMMV.

P.S.  This will not be in any version of digsby before r22555, it may or may not be included in releases with higher numbers.  I'll ask that it be added to the changelog when it does go out.

Chris, thanks a lot!  I'll look for that release and give it a test with LibraryH3lp.

FTR, this is *NOT* included in r22564.  should be in the next alpha, though.

chris wrote:

FTR, this is *NOT* included in r22564.  should be in the next alpha, though.

and it is.  http://blog.digsby.com/archives/660

Chris,

THANK YOU!  I can verify that the new gone state is working properly with LibraryH3lp's routing system.  Is it safe to say it will be in the next public release?

Thanks again.

psessoms wrote:

Chris,

THANK YOU!  I can verify that the new gone state is working properly with LibraryH3lp's routing system.  Is it safe to say it will be in the next public release?

Thanks again.

the only reason it would be taken out is if it caused problems, so, yes, it should be in the next public release.

chris wrote:

psessoms wrote:

Chris,

THANK YOU!  I can verify that the new gone state is working properly with LibraryH3lp's routing system.  Is it safe to say it will be in the next public release?

Thanks again.

the only reason it would be taken out is if it caused problems, so, yes, it should be in the next public release.

There have been some problems with XEP-0085 in general, due to incorrect implementation.  I've mostly fixed it.  Can someone tell me if LibraryH3lp responds with chatstates from XEP-0085, or if it just looks for them?

The way I've got it implemented right now is that extraneous chat states (those not accompanied by an actual message) will not be sent unless we know that the other side has acknowledged support for XEP-0085.

That basically means that if we don't receive a message with a chatstate, 'gone' will not be sent.  I'm looking into adding service discovery requests for XEP-0085 and the associated capabilities advertised in presence stanzas (XEP-0115).

Is this (just watching for messages with chatstate) sufficient for things to keep working for you guys?

Chris, thank you for keeping me in the loop.

>Is this (just watching for messages with chatstate)
>sufficient for things to keep working for you guys?

Yes.  Nice solution.

Thanks again!