Re: Addition of Gnome Jabber to cvs.gnome.org

[Christian Rose <menthos menthos com>]

fre 2003-08-22 klockan 01.32 skrev Martyn Russell:
> >Which brings up the question -- how does Gnome Jabber compare to Gossip?
> >What are the differences to Gossip? What's common? What are the
> >benefits? What are the drawbacks of one over the other?
>
> * How does it compare?
> 
> Ok, personally I think they are quite similar as far as look and feel 
> are concerned.  I was quite suprised when I first released my 
> application that two days later another (Gossip) was released and looked 
> identical.
> 
> The obvious difference is that Gnome Jabber has more features.  Gnome 
> Jabber has been developed since last summer and was not released until a 
> nine months or so after starting it which would explain why it is more 
> polished.
> 
> * What is common?
> 
> The look and feel is similar, especially when comparing the Roster layout.
> 
> * What are the differences to Gossip?
> 
> Mainly the workings of Gnome Jabber.  
> 
> 1. Gossip is based on Loudmouth (which looks quite good from what I have 
> seen).  I too was going to use a library but instead, decided to write 
> it all in one program to save on additional depend libraries.  The 
> interface, however, has been cut off from the jabber handling.
> 
> 2. Gnome Jabber is dependant on the GNet library 
> (http://www.gnetlibrary.org/) because originally I wanted to port the 
> client to Windows (which I have done).  I did write a TCP module in the 
> beginning but opted for GNet because it also supports SHA1, IPv6 and 
> very soon, SSL support.  Plus, other OS's are starting to include it in 
> their builds (I believe Debian unstable packages it).
> 
> * What are the benefits?
> 
> At this point none other than a lot of implemented features and a very 
> polished interface and re-iterated interface to capture the key 
> requirements that users want and have requested since it has been available.
> 
> * What are the draw backs of one over the other?
> 
> Personally I think that if I would do it all again, I would create a 
> library or atleast a sub-module of the code for handling the Jabber 
> interface.  Currently the code is divided in two halfs, files (starting 
> with gj_gtk) for the interface/GUI, and all others are Jabber 
> implementation files.  But creating a separate library is Gossip's 
> biggest advantage IMO.
> 
> Gossip's draw back is perhaps the lack of flexibility and I think in 
> some ways it is equal (in terms of Jabber supported features) to what 
> Gaim has to offer already.
> 
> I have spoken to Mark Finlay to is studying application design and 
> usability (and is member of the Gnome Foundation), and he has suggested 
> that the implementation of Gnome Jabber is from bottom up (i.e. I have 
> looked at what Jabber supports, and offered it in the GUI).  Gossip on 
> the other hand (he says...) has looked at what the user needs to be able 
> to accomplish and worked to provide that (a top down implementation). 
>  Mark also believes that Gossip has a higher usability that Gnome Jabber 
> mostly because of its simplicity.  To some extent, I agree.

Ah -- all very good things to know. Thanks for explaining.


> >Are you familiar with Gossip? Have you spoken to Richard and Mikael? If
> >there's any difference in goals or methods of the projects, I'm sure
> >people here would like to know about those.
>
> I have spoken directly the writers (Richard and Mikael) of Gossip.  They 
> have the same goals in mind, that is to produce a simple and easy to use 
> Jabber application for Gnome.
> 
> They will not stop development of Gossip or Loudmouth and perhaps my 
> efforts would be best concerntrated on Gossip instead.  This is 
> something I am considering!

Oh, that would of course be excellent!


Christian

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers