Re: possible (real) Net_ICQ/AIM/OSCAR pear package (?)

"Daniel @ Swn" <daniel@skywebs.net> escreveu na mensagem news:000201c35ee0$53db1da0$0100a8c0@swn... > > I would preffer to separate the packages. The goals for an unified > > Net_IM are too big. IMHO each protocol should have its own package, > > developers, release cycle, doc, etc, and if there is people willing to > > create the abstraction package Net_IM, it would be another package too > > I fully agree with this. My code is there to provide communication with > the ICQ network and I don't think that it would be a good idea to create > a Net_IM package since there is no other protocol implementation out > there yet (and maybe will never be). In addition protocols each have a > unique structure so it would be very confusing to read the code since > there are different developers for each (...) etc. The structure of the protocol may differ, but you can make an operation abstraction... The root class can have common operations for IM protocols like opening an connection, receiving events, sending messages, sending files... > I don't see any reason to do some work on a multiple protocol > implementation in Net_IM because there are no other protocols supported > than the one I am talking about. I even don't have a clue about creating > Net_IM as abstraction layer - since you have to decide which protocol > you are going to use it is a good idea to sepperate the packages. Because there's no implementation yet doesn't mean there will never be... Maybe others need a start kick like Net_IM. > "Net_ICQ" seems to be the best matching name because the class is > intended to communicate with ICQ. Net_Oscar would mean that there is > support for AIM too but in fact it is very limited to basic features and > not intended. You can have a hierarchy like: Net_IM -> Net_OSCAR -> Net_ICQ Net_IM -> Net_OSCAR -> Net_AIM And when your code is ready maybe we find someone interested in: Net_IM -> Net_PROPRIETARY_MS_PROTOCOL -> Net_MSN :-) Best Regards Cristiano Duarte