Wednesday, July 06, 2011
council@muc.xmpp.org
July
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
        1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
             
XMPP Council Room | https://xmpp.org/about/xmpp-standards-foundation#council | Room logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/ | https://trello.com/b/ww7zWMlI/xmpp-council-agenda

[06:31:56] *** Kev has joined the room
[06:31:58] *** Kev shows as "online"
[07:51:55] *** Kev has left the room
[07:52:15] *** Kev has joined the room
[07:52:16] *** Kev shows as "online"
[10:51:28] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[10:57:15] *** Kev shows as "away"
[11:08:41] *** Kev shows as "online"
[12:11:31] *** mlundblad has joined the room
[12:18:22] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[12:18:22] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[12:21:46] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[12:21:46] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[12:51:57] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[12:51:57] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[13:05:16] *** stpeter has joined the room
[13:11:24] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[13:11:24] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[13:49:25] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "bbiab"
[14:02:11] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[14:02:11] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[14:26:24] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[14:31:57] *** Fritzy has joined the room
[14:31:59] *** Fritzy shows as "online" and his status message is "Good morning."
[14:54:10] *** Fritzy shows as "away" and his status message is "Good morning."
[14:54:24] *** linuxwolf has joined the room
[14:55:58] *** Fritzy shows as "online" and his status message is "Good morning."
[15:01:07] *** MattJ has joined the room
[15:02:15] <stpeter> hmm, I need to push out revised versions of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-blanchet-precis-framework/ and https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-xmpp-6122bis/ before the document deadline next Monday....
[15:02:28] <Kev> And ding, 4pm.
[15:02:40] <Kev> Are we sitting comfortably? Then let's begin.
[15:02:48] <Kev> stpeter: That sounds fun.
[15:03:06] <stpeter> yes, fun indeed
[15:03:11] <Kev> 1) Roll Call
[15:03:14] <Kev> I'm here.
[15:03:17] <Fritzy> here
[15:03:17] <linuxwolf> presente
[15:03:22] <MattJ> Here
[15:03:29] <linuxwolf> omfg…we actually have a Fritzy! (-:
[15:03:30] <Kev> Huzzah.
[15:03:37] <Kev> 2) Agenda bashing.
[15:03:38] *stpeter laughs
[15:03:43] <Kev> I've noted adding Compliance.
[15:04:28] <Fritzy> none
[15:04:39] <linuxwolf> AOB, mabye
[15:04:41] <linuxwolf> maybe even
[15:04:49] <Kev> Ok.
[15:05:00] <Kev> 3) Accept 1.1rc2 of XEP-0143 ("Guidelines for Authors of XMPP
Extension Protocols").
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0143-1.1.html
http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0143/diff/1.0/vs/1.1rc2
[15:05:00] <MattJ> This has been nagging at me for a while
[15:05:08] <MattJ> Why do we have agenda bashing /and/ AOB? :)
[15:05:21] <Kev> MattJ: I have no idea, and often wondered that.
[15:05:27] <Fritzy> that sounds like a topic for AOB
[15:05:28] <Fritzy> ;)
[15:05:30] <MattJ> Kev, you have the power!
[15:05:38] <stpeter> agenda bashing could include removing items, I'd think
[15:05:40] <linuxwolf> that's what I was about to say, @Fritzy (-:
[15:05:45] <Kev> But I treot Agenda Bashing as Things Wot Require Votes, and AOB as discussion points.
[15:05:52] <Kev> In any case...
[15:05:53] <Kev> 3) Accept 1.1rc2 of XEP-0143 ("Guidelines for Authors of XMPP
Extension Protocols").
http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0143-1.1.html
http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0143/diff/1.0/vs/1.1rc2
[15:05:55] <MattJ> Fair enough
[15:05:58] <Kev> I'm +1.
[15:06:15] <MattJ> Me too
[15:06:27] <MattJ> I haven't read it in detail so maybe missed anything editorial
[15:06:34] <Fritzy> +1
[15:06:36] <linuxwolf> I'll vote on list
[15:06:36] <MattJ> But I like this XEP and these changes
[15:06:39] <Kev> I wonder if it's sensible to reference something else for the instructions on how to submit a patch, just so Peter doesn't require Council approval if he changes his favourite Git workflow, but I don't mind.
[15:06:56] <Fritzy> ah, that's probably a good idea for a future revision. ;)
[15:07:01] <linuxwolf> /nod
[15:07:25] <stpeter> probably not a bad idea for the Council to be aware of how things are done
[15:07:36] <Kev> Maybe it's sensible to require approval so Peter can't require authors to jump through hoops :)
[15:07:46] *** ralphm has joined the room
[15:07:53] <Fritzy> Or "future evil editor"
[15:07:55] <ralphm> hello
[15:08:01] <Kev> 4) Reverting the compliance suites.
[15:08:04] <Fritzy> howdy
[15:08:11] <ralphm> +1 on #3
[15:08:24] <Fritzy> what does that mean exactly (#4)
[15:08:29] <Kev> Are we agreed that Peter reverting the compliance suite 6120/3920 references was the right thing?
[15:08:32] <Kev> Fritzy: Was typing.
[15:08:46] <MattJ> I'm agreed
[15:08:50] <Kev> I think we didn't intend the compliance suites to be updated in the first place when we issued the blanket "please update everything".
[15:08:50] <ralphm> the reverting is good
[15:09:03] <linuxwolf> /agreed
[15:09:05] <Kev> Good.
[15:09:07] <Fritzy> ok
[15:09:24] <Kev> 5) Compliance 2012.
[15:09:31] <Kev> Do we want compliance suites this year?
[15:09:33] <MattJ> +1, IMHO
[15:09:52] <MattJ> I've always been a fan of the compliance XEPs, even though not as much has been made of them that could have been
[15:10:07] <MattJ> I think they're worth the small amount of effort
[15:10:19] <linuxwolf> +1 also
[15:10:36] <linuxwolf> they help authors determine what's in, and what they can cut corners on
[15:10:37] <Kev> I guess the logical follow-up question is what goes in them :)
[15:11:05] <linuxwolf> well, we could use the previous versions as a starting point (-:
[15:11:22] <Fritzy> sounds logical
[15:11:27] <Kev> I think we skipped 2011, making http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0270.html the most recent.
[15:11:41] <linuxwolf> then s/392[01]/612\1/g (-:
[15:12:11] <stpeter> yes we skipped 2011
[15:12:20] <linuxwolf> I don't think we need a new suite every year…but it's worth it now with the new XMPP specs
[15:12:20] <Kev> I'd like to strike -16 off the list, and replace it with 191.
[15:12:26] <Kev> I don't like -16.
[15:12:33] <Fritzy> :)
[15:12:37] <stpeter> yeah I don't either
[15:12:43] <Kev> Well, 'replace'. 191 is already there.
[15:13:05] <Kev> Otherwise, that looks like a fairly sensible base.
[15:13:19] <Kev> I'm not sure what else we'd particularly need on there.
[15:13:45] <linuxwolf> I'd like to add −201
[15:13:47] <Fritzy> should someone copy it up and put it in inbox for next meeting?
[15:13:54] <linuxwolf> maybe −296 if I can get it updated (-:
[15:14:11] <linuxwolf> Fritzy: +1
[15:14:18] <linuxwolf> and thanks for volunteering? (-:
[15:14:24] <stpeter> heh
[15:14:32] <Kev> I'm not entirely convinced about 201.
[15:14:38] <linuxwolf> I am
[15:14:42] <Kev> 296 seems much more valuable.
[15:15:07] <linuxwolf> I have a couple of nits to clean up in 296
[15:15:15] *** darkrain has joined the room
[15:15:18] <linuxwolf> but I can also see about starting on this compliance 2012
[15:15:31] <Kev> Shall we take it to list, then, and you can justify including 201 there? :)
[15:15:38] <linuxwolf> (-:
[15:15:46] <linuxwolf> it's not a hill for me to die on
[15:15:52] <MattJ> I'd be unsure of very recent XEPs in compliance suites
[15:16:08] <Kev> MattJ: Yes, me too, except that 296 is documenting best practice.
[15:16:13] <linuxwolf> exactly
[15:16:14] *stpeter types 'cp xep-0270.xml inbox/compliance2012.xml
[15:16:19] <linuxwolf> it's something a lot of clients are already doing
[15:16:26] <linuxwolf> well, the "good" clients (-:
[15:16:41] <linuxwolf> stpeter: hehe
[15:16:43] <ralphm> :-D
[15:16:48] <Kev> Although maybe referencing experimental XEPs in a compliance suite isn't smart.
[15:17:02] <Kev> I wonder if any of the others are.
[15:17:03] <ralphm> I fully agree there
[15:17:03] <linuxwolf> ok, so then I'll propose 296 move forward? (-:
[15:17:11] <ralphm> so I suppose stuff needs to happen before 2012
[15:17:28] <Fritzy> haha
[15:17:29] <Kev> Right.
[15:17:29] <linuxwolf> ralphm: we can start on it, but yes
[15:18:41] <Kev> So rough idea for the moment is to make compliance 2012 = 2010 + 6120 -16, and to consider threads and locking on-list?
[15:18:53] <MattJ> +1
[15:18:57] <linuxwolf> sure
[15:19:01] <Kev> Ok.
[15:19:10] <Kev> 6) Date of next meeting.
[15:19:14] <Kev> SBTSBC?
[15:19:19] <MattJ> +1
[15:19:23] <linuxwolf> +1
[15:19:31] <Fritzy> +1
[15:19:33] <MattJ> whether I can make it I don't know yet, I won't know until next week
[15:19:42] <MattJ> I'll try to send apologies in advance if I can't
[15:19:45] <Kev> Ta.
[15:20:13] <Kev> 7) Any other agenda bashing?
[15:20:39] <Fritzy> uh, AOB vs. Agenda Bashing?
[15:20:40] <Fritzy> ;)
[15:20:40] <linuxwolf> 1) a nit in 0297, the namespace is "urn:xmpp:forward:tmp", but it should be "urn:xmpp:forward:0", yes?
[15:21:03] <linuxwolf> 2) did anyone ever follow up on the xep-0220 discussion?
[15:21:20] <stpeter> I did not follow up on dialback
[15:21:33] <stpeter> that was my action item
[15:21:33] <Kev> linuxwolf: It should be, really, yes, now it's accepted.
[15:21:52] <MattJ> +1
[15:21:57] <MattJ> to #1
[15:22:04] <MattJ> and to following up on 220 as well
[15:22:13] <linuxwolf> Kev: I'm starting on an update to carbons, including msg-fwd, and found that little nit (-:
[15:22:20] <Kev> Wonderful, thanks.
[15:22:26] <Kev> I'll poke the authors.
[15:22:29] <linuxwolf> (-:
[15:22:31] <stpeter> I'll send the 220 message now before I do a deep dive on i18n madness
[15:22:35] <linuxwolf> I can provide you a patch (-:
[15:22:51] <Kev> I wouldn't bother, unless you've already done it :)
[15:23:02] <linuxwolf> I think I have…in one of my clones (-:
[15:23:02] <Kev> I suspect it'd take as long to apply the patch as to write it.
[15:23:12] <linuxwolf> Kev: yeah, pretty much
[15:23:28] <Kev> Aaaaanything else?
[15:23:34] <ralphm> nope
[15:23:35] <linuxwolf> nay from me
[15:23:47] <Fritzy> nodda
[15:23:55] <Kev> I'll try to remember to not include agenda bashing next time, and we can bash on-list, or AOB in the meeting.
[15:24:09] <Kev> Right, if we're all done...
[15:24:12] <Kev> Thanks all.
[15:24:20] *Kev gangs the bavel.
[15:24:32] *stpeter scrolls up to see if needs to do anything with 143 yet
[15:24:54] <stpeter> ah no, lw to vote on list
[15:25:04] <linuxwolf> stpeter: I didn't read the changes yet, sorry!
[15:25:09] <stpeter> no worries
[15:25:25] *linuxwolf likes to read first, vote second (-:
[15:25:40] <stpeter> details, details
[15:25:57] <linuxwolf> ok, off to prep for my next meeting...adios
[15:26:02] <Kev> Enjoy.
[15:26:03] <stpeter> enjoy!
[15:26:06] *** linuxwolf shows as "dnd" and his status message is "in a meeting!"
[15:26:32] <linuxwolf> today's light…only 3 (-:
[15:27:33] <stpeter> heh
[15:36:15] *** darkrain shows as "away" and his status message is "I'm not here right now"
[15:36:15] *** darkrain shows as "away" and his status message is "I'm not here right now"
[15:50:09] *** darkrain shows as "away" and his status message is "I'm not here right now"
[15:50:09] *** darkrain shows as "online" and his status message is "When I was your age, television was called books."
[15:50:24] *** darkrain has left the room
[16:00:14] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[16:06:46] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is "Away as a result of being idle"
[16:08:06] *** ralphm has left the room
[16:09:03] *** Fritzy has left the room
[16:41:19] <stpeter> ok I looked at the XEP-0220 issues
[16:41:25] <stpeter> at least briefly
[16:41:31] <stpeter> it is very frustrating
[16:41:56] <stpeter> and I have some IETF deadlines so I might need to delay real work on this until Tuesday
[16:51:29] <Kev> I'm sure it'll wait.
[16:52:23] <stpeter> I am about ready to suggest that Philipp and I need to work on separate specifications of the protocol, and the Council can decide which one it wants to advance -- until then, RFC 3920 will remain the canonical documentation
[16:56:38] <MattJ> That would be sad, but if it needs to happen to further the specs, so be it
[16:56:57] <stpeter> not sure yet -- I'll try to reach some consensus on the list
[17:03:24] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[17:03:26] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[17:06:53] *stpeter sends a conciliatory note
[17:10:03] *** Kooda shows as "xa" and his status message is "mange"
[17:24:44] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[17:33:52] <MattJ> stpeter, you're a trouble-maker ;)
[17:35:09] <linuxwolf> /-:
[17:41:43] <stpeter> sorry, I got annoyed
[17:41:48] <stpeter> there's no reason to be so snarky
[17:41:58] <stpeter> we're all trying to work toegher on this stuff
[17:42:06] <stpeter> together, even
[17:42:15] <MattJ> +1, your last email is fine by me
[17:42:24] <linuxwolf> I think I would have been ruder, myself (-:
[17:44:28] <stpeter> and http://about.psyc.eu/Jabber still contains numerous errors, but I don't publicly question their motives
[17:45:35] <MattJ> Don't remind me that page exists
[17:45:49] <MattJ> It's better than it used to be, at least
[17:46:31] <MattJ> Mainly since it no longer has the out-of-context quote of me
[17:46:31] <stpeter> ok, enough dialback for today, now I need to crank out a bunch of internationalization work and put together some slides for a presentation about XMPP on Friday before some "smart grid" group
[17:46:54] <MattJ> What's the not-so-smart grid?
[17:47:01] <stpeter> the dumb grid
[17:47:12] <stpeter> how electricity gets to your house :)
[17:47:31] <stpeter> people are making it smarter using demand-response technologies and such
[17:47:33] <MattJ> Evidently
[17:47:41] <stpeter> in fact they're already using XMPP (some of them, anyway)
[17:48:02] <stpeter> "price went up, you might want to turn off the clothes dryer" and such
[17:48:20] <stpeter> but the folks using XMPP are doing commercial and industrial applications mostly
[17:48:20] <Kev> They should purchase Swiften licenses to use as their libraries...
[17:48:37] <stpeter> Kev: good idea, I'll let them know ;-)
[17:48:59] <stpeter> also some embedded stuff -- actual XMPP-enabled washers and dryers and such
[17:49:07] <Kev> They should...
[17:49:07] <stpeter> it's a bit crazy ;-)
[17:49:37] <stpeter> the sensors stuff is semi-related -- I never saw further replies to those threads, though...
[17:50:23] <stpeter> anyway, bbiab
[17:50:28] <MattJ> :)
[17:50:35] <MattJ> brb, need to relocate to a printer
[17:50:50] <linuxwolf> I think it's time for lunch…bbl
[17:51:16] *** MattJ has left the room
[17:58:18] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[18:15:41] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[18:18:12] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[18:18:19] <stpeter> lunch is a good idea
[18:27:03] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[18:27:04] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[18:30:39] *** Kev shows as "away"
[18:34:14] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[18:34:15] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[18:36:10] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[18:42:55] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[19:08:23] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[20:13:34] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[20:19:33] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[20:25:07] *** Kev shows as "online"
[20:30:04] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[20:30:07] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[20:40:09] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[20:51:16] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[20:53:57] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[20:53:57] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[20:58:01] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[20:58:58] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[20:58:58] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[21:10:44] *** Kev shows as "away"
[21:15:57] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[21:21:11] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[21:25:22] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[21:25:22] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[21:25:56] *** linuxwolf shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[21:45:31] *** mlundblad has left the room
[21:51:49] *** mlundblad has joined the room
[22:00:22] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:00:22] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:00:42] *** linuxwolf has left the room
[22:05:25] *** linuxwolf has joined the room
[22:12:34] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:12:34] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[22:17:34] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:17:34] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:22:55] *** mlundblad shows as "away"
[22:22:55] *** mlundblad shows as "online"
[22:23:04] *** linuxwolf shows as "dnd" and his status message is "in a meeting!"
[22:34:12] *** Kooda has joined the room
[22:38:53] *** mlundblad has left the room
[22:46:01] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[22:51:32] *** Kooda shows as "away" and his status message is "dodo"
[23:06:01] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[23:21:26] *** linuxwolf shows as "online"
[23:25:24] *** linuxwolf has left the room
[23:31:43] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[23:57:14] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[23:59:58] *** stpeter shows as "online"