[jadmin] Disable "invisible" status

[Alejandro Cabrera Obed]

Dear all, I have jabberd2 as my jabber server and I have several users
with PSI client.

From PSI client the users can change their status from Online to
Invisible, but I don't want that because they can't never be invisible
for job reasons.

Is it possible to disable the "invisible" status from within the
jabberd2 in order to avoid people to choose it ???

Really thanks

Alejandro
_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Tomasz Sterna]

Dnia 2008-05-20, wto o godzinie 15:36 -0300, Alejandro Cabrera Obed
pisze:
> Is it possible to disable the "invisible" status from within the
> jabberd2 in order to avoid people to choose it ???

jabberd 2.1.x does not support invisible status at all.


--
/\_./o__ Tomasz Sterna
(/^/(_^^' http://www.xiaoka.com/
._.(_.)_ im:smoku (AT) xiaoka (DOT) com

_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Luke -Jr]

On Tuesday 20 May 2008, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 2008-05-20, wto o godzinie 15:36 -0300, Alejandro Cabrera Obed
>
> pisze:
> > Is it possible to disable the "invisible" status from within the
> > jabberd2 in order to avoid people to choose it ???
>
> jabberd 2.1.x does not support invisible status at all.

Isn't invisible status merely sending an "offline" presence but remaining
connected?
_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Lastwebpage]

jabberd 2.1.x does not support invisible status at all.

Is this true?
Was this curio "invisible" status removed forever from the jabberd server software? Or only from version 2.1. ?

If yes, why? Are there any plans to remove it from the XMPP protocol in general?

regards
Peter

[Maxim Britov]

On Fri, 23 May 2008 16:16:29 +0200
JabberForum wrote:

>
> Tomasz Sterna;387 Wrote:
> > jabberd 2.1.x does not support invisible status at all.
> >
> Is this true?
> Was this curio "invisible" status removed forever from the jabberd
> server software? Or only from version 2.1. ?
>
> If yes, why? Are there any plans to remove it from the XMPP protocol in
> general?

http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html


--
Maxim Britov

GnuPG KeyID 0x4580A6D66F3DB1FB xmpp:maxim (AT) modum (DOT) by
Fingerprint: 4059 B5C5 8985 5A47 8F5A 8623 4580 A6D6 6F3D B1FB
GnuPG-ru Team (http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-ru
xmpp:gnupg-ru (AT) conference (DOT) jabber.ru)
_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Tomasz Sterna]

Dnia 2008-05-23, pią o godzinie 16:16 +0200, JabberForum pisze:
> Is this true?
> Was this curio "invisible" status removed forever from the jabberd
> server software? Or only from version 2.1. ?

It's not present in 2.1.x series and in 2.2.x series.


> If yes, why?

Because it is non standard legacy causing many problems.


> Are there any plans to remove it from the XMPP protocol in
> general?

It was never included in XMPP protocols.


--
/\_./o__ Tomasz Sterna
(/^/(_^^' http://www.xiaoka.com/
._.(_.)_ im:smoku (AT) xiaoka (DOT) com

_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 05/23/2008 8:30 AM, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 2008-05-23, pią o godzinie 16:16 +0200, JabberForum pisze:
>> Is this true?
>> Was this curio "invisible" status removed forever from the jabberd
>> server software? Or only from version 2.1. ?
>
> It's not present in 2.1.x series and in 2.2.x series.
>
>
>> If yes, why?
>
> Because it is non standard legacy causing many problems.
>
>
>> Are there any plans to remove it from the XMPP protocol in
>> general?
>
> It was never included in XMPP protocols.

What Tomasz says. :)

Now we *might* define a "shortcut" method for this:

http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html

By "shortcut" I mean that XEP-0186: Invisible Command is to invisibility
via privacy lists (see XEP-0126) as XEP-0191: Simple Communications
Blocking is to blocking via privacy lists.

In fact I'd like to get that work done soon so that we can stop having
this conversation. :)

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/



_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
JAdmin (AT) jabber (DOT) org
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
_______________________________________________

[Lastwebpage]

Let me say it carefully... ;)

My client (Miranda IM) have something like XEP-0126,
but it not work a little bit to much complicated.

If "invisble" is not a "main" status in general, like online, away, not disturb,...
I can goad the Miranda jabber developers to fix this problems with the invisible status a little bit faster. ;)

Peter

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 05/23/2008 9:49 AM, JabberForum wrote:
> Let me say it carefully... ;)
>
> My client (Miranda IM) have something like XEP-0126,
> but it not work a little bit to much complicated.
>
> If "invisble" is not a "main" status in general, like online, away, not
> disturb,...
> I can goad the Miranda jabber developers to fix this problems with the
> invisible status a little bit faster. ;)

Is that a vote for XEP-0186 or for XEP-0018? I don't think we will ever
standardize <presence type='invisible'/> (XEP-0018), but I think we
probably will standardize an "invisible command" (XEP-0186), which is
functionally equivalent to type='invisible' but a bit cleaner for us to
move forward as a standard.

Let us know. :)

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19
Info:http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
Unsubscribe: JAdmin-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________

[Lastwebpage]

This is not a vote. ;)
- I only know that I can choose invisible in my client as a regular status, but this not work very well
- I am not a friend of "invisible" in general, see http://www.jabberforum.org/showthread.php?t=46 for the reasons.

Peter

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 05/23/2008 10:48 AM, JabberForum wrote:
> This is not a vote. ;)
> - I only know that I can choose invisible in my client as a regular
> status, but this not work very well
> - I am not a friend of "invisible" in general, see
> http://www.jabberforum.org/showthread.php?t=46 for the reasons.

I agree. But some people think it's a beautiful thing, so I'd like to at
least support it in the least hacky way possible.

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


_______________________________________________
JAdmin mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jadmin-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jadmin
Unsubscribe: JAdmin-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________