I added implementation for this feature and as I tested it it works fine and may improve code readability, however I would consider this just a begining and this code may change in future.

Yes, I agree. Our framework architect %bmalkow will review it in next version and perhaps suggest a better way.

Ups, and... Wow. I am sorry, I mistakenly assumed this is a different ticket to change code for Auth plugin. This is really cool stuff. I like it. I agree this is much better then the old way. I am OK with pushing this to the 7.0.0 and rewrite all the plugins, even though we are at the final stage of the version. This change is worth it.

By the way. You remember that my last changes introduced also stanza type as one of the elements defining supported stanzas by a plugin? This is important to split Presence processing into separate plugins. One for subscriptions and another for online/offline processing. This is important because subscription require DB access and are slow but others do not require DB and are fast.

I wanted just to push it to 7.0.0 to add possibility to use it in future plugins, (ie. by custom plugins created by our user), but not necessary to rewrite all plugins for 7.0.0 release but maybe for 7.1.0.

I remember your changes which introduced stanza type as one of criteria to check if plugin supports stanza. I remember our chat about possible changes in this processing, but how it is related to what I done in this changes?

Should I add annotation for type of stanza as well or maybe something else you would like me to do?

Andrzej Wójcik wrote:

I wanted just to push it to 7.0.0 to add possibility to use it in future plugins, (ie. by custom plugins created by our user), but not necessary to rewrite all plugins for 7.0.0 release but maybe for 7.1.0.

Good point, but if there is code example, nobody would use it anyway because nobody knows how to use it. So we need at least a few plugins to use the new API.

I remember your changes which introduced stanza type as one of criteria to check if plugin supports stanza. I remember our chat about possible changes in this processing, but how it is related to what I done in this changes? Should I add annotation for type of stanza as well or maybe something else you would like me to do?

Yes, I thought of adding annotation for the stanza type as well, to have a complete API for this.

I addded @HandleStanzaType annotation, converted few processors to use annotations as an example and update DevGuide section about writting processors.

Good work.