787057 - Add support of Status.Net (feature request)

Status: NEW

(Thunderbird :: Instant Messaging, enhancement)

Description

[Gérald Niel]

Status.Net (here is a link to API description : http://status.net/wiki/Twitter-compatible_API) is not supported in the list of instant messaging protocol.
It would be appreciate to add the support of Status.Net near Twitter support.

Comment 1

[Patrick Cloke [:clokep]]

Corresponding Instantbird bug: https://bugzilla.instantbird.org/show_bug.cgi?id=237

This should be fairly easy via some abstraction/inheritance from the Twitter protocol implementation, the tricky party (that I know of) might be dealing with different authentication scheme and maybe some assumptions we have about the Twitter API.

Comment 3

[Mikael M. Nordfeldth]

Yes, the StatusNet API, though more capable in several ways (dynamic character limit etc.), is designed to be Twitter compatible. If there are any interoperability issues due to StatusNet failing this, then those issues may be reported on http://status.net/open-source

One possible way of rather quickly implementing this feature is as Patrick Cloke mentions the authentication (both p/w args and some oauth-version are supported by StatusNet software).

The assumptions about Twitter API that might cause user issues is the site-decided character limit. How StatusNet solves this is by shortening + adding an expand button (...) to still be able to view the entire message if your personal federated site is configured with a lower limit. (just don't throw an error!)

Comment 4

[Patrick Cloke [:clokep]]

(In reply to Mikael M. Nordfeldth from comment #3)
> Yes, the StatusNet API, though more capable in several ways (dynamic
> character limit etc.), is designed to be Twitter compatible.
This shouldn't really be an issue.

> If there are
> any interoperability issues due to StatusNet failing this, then those issues
> may be reported on http://status.net/open-source
This is a concern, we obviously want to be able to use new features of the Twitter API and they occasionally change things without much notice. It would be much harder to maintain compatibility with (possibly out of date versions of) StatusNet and Twitter.

> One possible way of rather quickly implementing this feature is as Patrick
> Cloke mentions the authentication (both p/w args and some oauth-version are
> supported by StatusNet software).
I actually meant that as one of the big roadblocks to implementing this. ;)

If someone wants to try this they can start by changing http://lxr.instantbird.org/instantbird/source/chat/protocols/twitter/twitter.js#346 (and other references to twitter.com? in that file). This is wanted, but I don't think any of the chat developers are currently willing to put any time into it.

Comment 5

[Mikael M. Nordfeldth]

> > One possible way of rather quickly implementing this feature is as Patrick
> > Cloke mentions the authentication (both p/w args and some oauth-version are
> > supported by StatusNet software).
> I actually meant that as one of the big roadblocks to implementing this. ;)

...I think my paragraph got corrupted (by me) somewhere in the middle. I meant to say it _shouldn't_ be much of a problem... but we'll see :)

> If someone wants to try this they can start by changing
> http://lxr.instantbird.org/instantbird/source/chat/protocols/twitter/twitter.
> js#346 (and other references to twitter.com? in that file). This is wanted,
> but I don't think any of the chat developers are currently willing to put
> any time into it.

I'll definitely look into it! I know it's easy to say so and get lost in the process however, so anyone else reading this thread afterwards should not assume I succeeded. But off I go!

Comment 6

[Patrick Cloke [:clokep]]

(In reply to Mikael M. Nordfeldth from comment #5)
> > If someone wants to try this they can start by changing
> > http://lxr.instantbird.org/instantbird/source/chat/protocols/twitter/twitter.
> > js#346 (and other references to twitter.com? in that file). This is wanted,
> > but I don't think any of the chat developers are currently willing to put
> > any time into it.
> 
> I'll definitely look into it! I know it's easy to say so and get lost in the
> process however, so anyone else reading this thread afterwards should not
> assume I succeeded. But off I go!
Let us know how it goes, stop by IRC (#instantbird or #maildev) if you want to ask me any questions.