Idle time a la AIM

I’‘ve searched the forum for “idle” and “last activity”. I’‘m wondering if there’‘s any way to add support for idle times to wildfire. My coworkers are accustomed to it from using AIM for personal use and would like to see it on our corporate network. We’'re all using gaim and adium as our clients.


Spark 1.1.4 does displays "Away since: " for the buddies but it’'s using a timer on client side. So if you just login and some users are “away” you will not know when they set their status to away. I think I did miss this feature in Spark 2.0.5.


Yeah. I’‘m looking for something that will provide the same end user experience as AIM’‘s idle time reporting. I would like it to be completely seperate from away reporting in that my users want to be able to go idle if they leave their desk without going away. Many times they don’'t realize that gaim has set them auto-away and then they are away for a while after they return to their desk. On AIM this “just works”.

This is not a server issue, but a client-side one: XEP-0012

Yes, I saw that XEP. I’‘m wondering if wildfire actually supports it. I’‘ve played with Spark and watched the IQ messages and there doesn’‘t seem to be any last activity traffic. If the server supports it, I don’‘t mind generating a patch for gaim (wouldn’'t be the first time).

Edit: I’‘m actually more confused now. I just noticed under the detailed section of a user’'s session it lists a “Session Last Active” value. Is that merely the last time a packet was received from the client?

Message was edited by: knothead

Hey Ryan,

Wildfire is always returning 0 when the user is online. The number of seconds will be greater than 0 only when the user is offline. However, XEP-12 specifies that when the user is online then the IQ should go to the full JID. That means that the server is not responsible for handling that packet. Instead it will forward the packet to the target user. In other words, it is up to the client to correctly respond to that IQ packet. If you are using Gaim or Psi then you will have to implement some patch to handle the IQ packet if it is not already handling it.


– Gato

Awesome. Thanks Gato, you’'re on top of things as usual.