headers
Jason Kim | 1 Dec 2005 21:56

Psi Logo Usage (Was: Re: Note on Windows Installer Graphics)

This brings up a good point, actually. Is there a compiled list  
anywhere of all of the graphics that need to be updated to keep Psi  
consistent? Things like installer graphics, icons, the about panel,  
and wiki/forum graphics should use the same logo and general theme.

If there isn't a list, perhaps we should compile one on the wiki.  
This should include notes specific to each image such as any required  
dimensions, file format, and other requirements (for instance, the  
note about the installer icons from Mircea). I think a list like this  
will make the transition efficient, now and in the future.

Also, I haven't had a chance yet to revise the logos according to the  
comments I received, but I'll try to do that shortly.

-Jason

On Nov 25, 2005, at 1:41 PM, Hal Rottenberg wrote:

> thanks Mircea.
>
>
> On 11/25/05, Mircea Bardac <dev.list@...> wrote:
>> Due to the recent decision regarding Project's webiste design, I  
>> would like to
>> point out that the Windows Installer Will need updates for the  
>> files here:
>> * http://mircea.bardac.net/temp/psi/
>> (note: this is mray's design; they can also be downloaded from the  
>> darcs
>> repository, but I guess taking them from the above url is faster)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Hal Rottenberg | 2 Dec 2005 05:21
Picon

Re: Psi Logo Usage (Was: Re: Note on Windows Installer Graphics)

On 12/1/05, Jason Kim <jason-psi-devel@...> wrote:
> This brings up a good point, actually. Is there a compiled list
> anywhere of all of the graphics that need to be updated to keep Psi
> consistent? Things like installer graphics, icons, the about panel,
> and wiki/forum graphics should use the same logo and general theme.
> If there isn't a list, perhaps we should compile one on the wiki.

Great idea.  Kev might have some specs for the code, but there isn't
anything unified, and I haven't doc'd any of the web stuff.

I'll work on something over the next day or two.

> Also, I haven't had a chance yet to revise the logos according to the
> comments I received, but I'll try to do that shortly.

Cool.

--
Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal@...
http://halr9000.com
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Remko Troncon | 2 Dec 2005 10:53

Re: Psi Logo Usage (Was: Re: Note on Windows Installer Graphics)

> Great idea.  Kev might have some specs for the code, but there isn't
> anything unified, and I haven't doc'd any of the web stuff.

I have put the specs for the code and the Mac OS X installer on 
	http://psi-im.org/wiki/Logo_Icons

cheers,
Remko
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Hal Rottenberg | 2 Dec 2005 21:50
Picon

Re: Psi Logo Usage (Was: Re: Note on Windows Installer Graphics)

On 12/2/05, Remko Troncon <remko@...> wrote:
> > Great idea.  Kev might have some specs for the code, but there isn't
> > anything unified, and I haven't doc'd any of the web stuff.
>
> I have put the specs for the code and the Mac OS X installer on
>         http://psi-im.org/wiki/Logo_Icons

Thx Remko.  IceRAM and I are filling out the rest.

--
Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal@...
http://halr9000.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Marcin Zajączkowski | 2 Dec 2005 22:03
Picon
Favicon

Re: [ANN] Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?


Because I didn't get any answer I have one question, why?

1. You treated this post as spam and didn't read it?
2. No one is interested in adding VoIP to Psi?
3. You considered that Johnny Talker idea is generally speaking bad idea 
and didn't even want to reply to?

I wrote Johnny Talker to give developers a tool for fast and easy 
creation of VoIP-based applications and adding that functionality to 
already existed programs (like IM clients).

I was ready for constructive critics, but no reply is very sad for me. 
That could mean that program is so hopeless that no one didn't even want 
to reply to my post.

Disappointed developer
Marcin
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Kevin Smith | 2 Dec 2005 22:42
Picon

Re: [ANN] Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?

On 2 Dec 2005, at 21:03, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote:
> Because I didn't get any answer I have one question, why?
It passed me by.
I've now had a look at the webpage and it's not clear to me how this  
fits into the jabber voice standards, either the depricated TINS, or  
the new Jingle spec.

> I was ready for constructive critics, but no reply is very sad for me.
> That could mean that program is so hopeless that no one didn't even  
> want
> to reply to my post.

It's not really that I have criticism, I just don't see how this  
directly applies to us. I couldn't even determine if it's cross- 
platform from my first inspection.

/K

--

-- 
Kevin Smith
Psi Jabber client maintainer (http://psi-im.org/)
Postgraduate Research Student, Computer Science, University Of Exeter

_______________________________________________
psi-devel mailing list
psi-devel <at> lists.affinix.com
http://lists.affinix.com/listinfo.cgi/psi-devel-affinix.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Norman Rasmussen | 3 Dec 2005 23:17
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [ANN] Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?

As a matter of interest, how easy would it be to fit Jonny Talker into
Psi (or any other app) and make it work with non-Jonny Talker
implementations?

i.e. do you need Jonny Talker at both ends, or is it any IAX client? 
How will IAX 'fit' into the xmpp voip model I wonder.

On 12/3/05, Marcin Zajączkowski <mszpak@...> wrote:
> Kevin Smith wrote:
> > On 2 Dec 2005, at 21:03, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote:
> >>Because I didn't get any answer I have one question, why?
> >
> > It passed me by.
> > I've now had a look at the webpage and it's not clear to me how this
> > fits into the jabber voice standards, either the depricated TINS, or
> > the new Jingle spec.
>
> This means that my message was too general.
> My first idea was to add VoIP functionality to Psi. But after some
> ponder upon it, I realized that there is too many Jabber clients whose
> can't talk each other. So I decided to make something "bigger" - the
> tool (back-end) which allows to fast and easy write VoiP client or add
> that functionality to for example Jabber client and all those software
> would be compatible!
> I chose solution not based on Jabber - IAX protocol, to widen potential
> applications. Johnny Talker is something more that another VoIP library.
> Due to its dual form, developer of final VoIP application is isolated
> from VoIP (I know it's little strange). You don't need to have VoIP
> knowledge to write (fast & easy) your own softphone.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Francisco Joaquín Rodríguez Prados | 3 Dec 2005 23:21
Picon

Re: [ANN] Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?

I'm not a Psi developer, so this is my opinion, not the Psi official position.

I would really like to see Jabber (concretely Psi) offering VoIP
capabilities. Somehow the presence service is related also with voice
conversations - it's a good idea to have a live agenda; you call your
friends when they are reachable - i.e.: they have announced their
presence in the system.

However, the Psi project is still working on covering several
functionalities which are already a standard in Jabber. And the
standard are high priority, or should be, in my opinion. It is a risk
- and maybe a waste of time - invest efforts and time on protocols
which might not work with any other client, more than Psi. So I see
two big problems, at this point; first, there are more basic tasks
that require the attention of the Psi project at the moment; and
secondly, there is no standard for Jabber-based voice conversation.

Thought the first problem might be solved if someone just invested his
time on coding this connection you suggest between your daemon and
Psi, the second one would still be there. There's not specified
protocol for the handshaking or the "incoming call" announcements, for
instance, appart from the own protocols that iChat and GoogleTalk
implemented.

The closest possibility I see would be attach to Psi this /de facto/
protocol of GoogleTalk and iChat (I don't even know if they are
compatible among them). In any case, we still would have to wait for a
full specification of this protocol.

Best regards,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 20 comments |
headers
Remko Troncon | 4 Dec 2005 02:55

Re: Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?


On 03 Dec 2005, at 23:21, Francisco Joaquín Rodríguez Prados wrote:

> The closest possibility I see would be attach to Psi this /de facto/
> protocol of GoogleTalk and iChat (I don't even know if they are
> compatible among them). In any case, we still would have to wait for a
> full specification of this protocol.

No, they are not compatible. However, it was mentioned before that  
Google showed interest in making a  specification of their protocol  
public at some point, so we'll wait and see what happens there.

cheers,
Remko
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Marcin Zajączkowski | 4 Dec 2005 21:14
Picon
Favicon

Re: [ANN] Johnny Talker - revolution in creation of VoIP-based applications?

Francisco Joaquín Rodríguez Prados wrote:
> I'm not a Psi developer, so this is my opinion, not the Psi official
> position.
> 
> I would really like to see Jabber (concretely Psi) offering VoIP 
> capabilities. Somehow the presence service is related also with voice
>  conversations - it's a good idea to have a live agenda; you call
> your friends when they are reachable - i.e.: they have announced
> their presence in the system.

I saw something like that made on IAX text messages by freshtel 
(firefly), but this is not standard in VoIP. In my opinion better 
solution is to leave this functionality in Jabber and allow IAX (and 
Johnny Talker) to be only mechanism to make calls.
People using Psi (powered by Johnny Talker) see who is online (by 
Jabber) and can initiate (or receive) call from others. Presents 
subsystem had to be production standard to be useful and this would be 
hard to achieve. Let's think about IP phones (VoIP clients made in 
hardware - without computer).
As long as Johnny Talker is compatible with IAX people can talk with 
other using VoIP and though IAX telephone providers also very cheap to 
PSTN (normal phones) and mobiles.

> However, the Psi project is still working on covering several 
> functionalities which are already a standard in Jabber. And the 
> standard are high priority, or should be, in my opinion. It is a risk
>  - and maybe a waste of time - invest efforts and time on protocols 
> which might not work with any other client, more than Psi. So I see 
> two big problems, at this point; first, there are more basic tasks 
> that require the attention of the Psi project at the moment; and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 18 comments |

Gmane