Bounty for voice/video support in Pidgin

Richard Laager rlaager at
Sat Jul 26 15:55:26 EDT 2008

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 10:54 -0700, Mark Doliner wrote:
> 1. Break the project into subprojects.  We should at least split up
> the various protocols, and possibly separate voice from video.

I have some various questions and thoughts for discussion before I run
off and make subprojects...

Should these be split up equally or not?

To me, it seems that voice is more important than video, because people
who want to use webcams would generally expect that the audio work at
the same time. At the same time, if implementing video implies audio,
then you'd be able to claim both at once (or audio first) anyway.

It also seems to me that we would want to prefer XMPP over proprietary

From there, I think we'd want to allocate resources to protocols in
order of the difficulty of work. However, we could go either way with
that. Offering more money for a harder protocol makes it more likely
someone will pick that up, but offering more money for the easier
protocol would steer effort in the direction that would get us the
fastest bang for our buck.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the Devel mailing list