Details
New Feature
Open
Major
Description
Sometimes it may be required to create a group and add a list of members. However, the new group is not required to appear in the members' rosters but only to some other list of groups. This means that only selected groups in "Show group to members' rosters of these groups:" will be able to see this group but not the group members (unless they belong to a group of the list).
Issue Links
- is related to
-
OF-280
Presence is broken in certain Shared Group configurations
-
Activity
Hello Gato!
Without wanting to sound sarcastic in a way, but shared groups are IMHO in no way difficult or complex! Instead the concept isvery clear and plain simple:
There is a kind of "sender" whose presence is exposed and a number of receivers which should get these presence. Is there any more to it?
Now we simply have a finite amount of cases, with the two most important ones are:
- receiver gets updates because of a direct subscription to the sender
- receiver is part of a groupX which should get updates of the groupY the sender is in, where X=Y is not only possible but some kind of "default" as this would mean sharing to members of the group your are also in.
There seems to be more behind it, but for me this looks like JUST looking up what groups the sender is in and enumerate through one group at a time and sending out presence changes according to "what to do with each group". This means send out to members of this group yes/no (which is this very JM-802 !) and then look up the"addon" groups . For each add group we have to enumerate through its members.
Before any optimisations receiver X could get multiple updates because of some redundancies (member of more than 1 group envolved, has direct subscription to sender anyway, etc...)
Thats about it? Did I miss something?
But it is very likely that your implementation as well as some performance driven "shortcuts" now make it difficult to actually deliver the flexibility as it was originally intended. Take this with a bit of salt from a non-coder thinking more in concepts than in source code! 
Dont consider this as a harsh critics but instead of sombody feeling with you who also suffers sometimes from legacy stuff ....
Bye
Starry
- receiver gets updates because of a direct subscription to the sender
- receiver is part of a groupX which should get updates of the groupY the sender is in, where X=Y is not only possible but some kind of "default" as this would mean sharing to members of the group your are also in. There seems to be more behind it, but for me this looks like JUST looking up what groups the sender is in and enumerate through one group at a time and sending out presence changes according to "what to do with each group". This means send out to members of this group yes/no (which is this very JM-802 !) and then look up the"addon" groups . For each add group we have to enumerate through its members. Before any optimisations receiver X could get multiple updates because of some redundancies (member of more than 1 group envolved, has direct subscription to sender anyway, etc...) Thats about it? Did I miss something?
Dont consider this as a harsh critics but instead of sombody feeling with you who also suffers sometimes from legacy stuff ....
Bye
Starry
A typical scenario would be to link a pool of support people to a group of sales guys:
Users Ext1 and Ext2 are members of group EXTERNALS
Users Tech1 and Tech2 are members of group TECHIES
Now configure Group EXTERNALS with "Group Display Name "Externals" and "Show group to members' rosters of these groups: TECHIES"
2. configure Group TECHIES with "Group Display Name "Techies" and "Show group to members' rosters of these groups: TECHIES + EXTERNALS"
As far as I understand it, that should show
a) Ext1, Ext2, Tech2 in the Roster of Tech1 (because of 1. & 2.)
b) Ext1, Ext2, Tech1 in the Roster of Tech2 (because of 1. & 2.)
c) Tech1, Tech2 in the Roster of Ext1 (because of 2.)
d) Tech1, Tech2 in the Roster of Ext2 (because of 2.)
Fact (bug?) is that
e) Ext1 sees ALSO Ext2 in his roster
f9 Ext2 sees ALSO Ext1 in his roster