CollectionNode/pubsub#node_config not following XEP-0060

Hi all,

I just wanted to point out that the support for XEP-0060 should be updated, ie.

<field var="pubsub#leaf_node_association_policy" type="list-single" label="Users allowed to associate leaf nodes with the node"/>
<field var="pubsub#leaf_node_association_whitelist" type="jid-multi" label="Enter list of users"/>
<field var="pubsub#leaf_nodes_max" type="text-single" label="Max number of leaf nodes"/>

are no longer (dunno since when actually) valid XEP-0060. They should be instead:

<field var='pubsub#children_association_whitelist'
         label='The list of JIDs that may associate leaf nodes with a collection'/>
  <field var='pubsub#children_association_policy'          type='list-single'
         label='Who may associate leaf nodes with a collection'> <field var='pubsub#children_max'
         label='The maximum number of child nodes that can be associated with a collection'/>

Smack is ok, therefore if you build a ConfigureForm for this using Smack (or manually following XEP-0060), and send it to the OpenFire server, it will just ignore it

I suppose this has to be fixed: org/jivesoftware/openfire/pubsub/CollectionNode.html

And the database table, too.

I would add just another thing: if one sets pubsub#leaf_node_association_policy to whitelist, and in pubsub#leaf_node_association_whitelist puts a JID, then this JID is added to the ofPubsubNodeJIDs table.

But this doesn’t seem to associate in any way the JID with the node, ie. the JID cannot add a leafnode to the collection node although it is in this table… so what’s the point?

Furthermore, as explained here:

If a node is set to use the whitelist, then in order to add an item to it, the owner should set the entity affiliation to “member” (which is not supported by OpenFire :|) - how does one use the whitelist? I mean it should allow only members to get items/subscribe to the node.

It seems if one sets pubsub#leaf_node_association_policy to **whitelist **then the node will only be accessible by its owners, correct me if I am wrong.

EDIT: ok scratch that, it seems I was adding the bare JID to **ofPubsubNodeJIDs **while trying to create the leafnode with a full JID using the same JID everything goes smoothly…