i suggest to think in persons, not protocols
that comes to one more naturally.
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 17:04, Asaf Zamir <email address hidden> wrote:
> Is it a fair guess that the logs would be merged between the contacts or
> would it be by ID (so John@MSN won't be the same log as John@ICQ)?
> How is it on Pidgin? Log merging or not?
>
there is no need to merge anything here. logs should and hopefully will be
displayed, threaded to a person, honoring the user's rules for each
metacontact..
pidgin: can't tell you about how logs are handled there.. all i know is that
two semantically different models of the concept "group" are mixed in the
pidgin contact list..
i suggest to think in persons, not protocols
that comes to one more naturally.
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 17:04, Asaf Zamir <email address hidden> wrote:
> Is it a fair guess that the logs would be merged between the contacts or
> would it be by ID (so John@MSN won't be the same log as John@ICQ)?
> How is it on Pidgin? Log merging or not?
>
there is no need to merge anything here. logs should and hopefully will be
displayed, threaded to a person, honoring the user's rules for each
metacontact..
pidgin: can't tell you about how logs are handled there.. all i know is that
two semantically different models of the concept "group" are mixed in the
pidgin contact list..