Wednesday, June 27, 2012
council@muc.xmpp.org
June
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
 
             
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

[00:01:00] *** Kooda shows as "away" and his status message is "dodo"
[00:34:33] *** m&m has joined the room
[00:40:00] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "zzz"
[00:40:01] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "zzz"
[00:46:19] *** Tobias has left the room
[01:50:50] *** m&m has left the room
[02:24:47] *** m&m has joined the room
[02:24:59] *** m&m has left the room
[06:24:59] *** Kev shows as "online"
[06:53:55] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[08:33:38] *** Tobias has left the room
[09:10:10] *** Tobias has joined the room
[09:10:13] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "zzz"
[09:25:10] *** Tobias has left the room
[09:48:23] *** Kev shows as "away"
[10:06:19] *** Kooda shows as "away" and his status message is "mange"
[10:11:23] *** Tobias has joined the room
[10:11:24] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "zzz"
[10:15:44] *** Kev shows as "online"
[10:20:32] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[10:27:05] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[10:40:48] *** Kev shows as "away"
[10:43:52] *** Kev shows as "online"
[11:20:27] *** Kev shows as "away"
[11:35:24] *** Kev shows as "online"
[12:30:29] *** stpeter has joined the room
[12:41:56] *** Kev has left the room
[12:42:03] *** Kev shows as "online"
[12:42:04] *** Kev shows as "online"
[13:05:48] *** Tobias has left the room
[13:14:23] *** m&m has joined the room
[13:15:33] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[13:35:33] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[13:48:15] *** Tobias has joined the room
[13:48:15] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[14:02:46] *** m&m shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[14:04:38] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[14:10:14] *** m&m shows as "online"
[14:28:01] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[14:40:43] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[14:53:18] *** MattJ has joined the room
[14:54:17] <m&m> T - 10
[14:55:30] <Kev> Thanks.
[15:03:09] *** stpeter shows as "dnd" and his status message is "in a meeting"
[15:04:43] <stpeter> T - 0 ? ;-)
[15:05:09] <MattJ> T+1
[15:05:13] <Kev> Yep.
[15:05:13] <stpeter> :)
[15:05:19] <Kev> 1) Roll call.
[15:05:24] <m&m> presente
[15:05:24] <Kev> Ralph sends apologies.
[15:05:25] <Tobias> present
[15:05:32] <Kev> (about 2 minutes ago)
[15:05:45] <Kev> MattJ: .
[15:05:47] <m&m> he indicated last week it was likely he'd miss
[15:05:49] <stpeter> Matthew is around, I think
[15:05:56] <m&m> he == Ralph
[15:06:00] <Kev> m&m: Ta.
[15:06:03] <MattJ> Present
[15:06:14] <Kev> 2) LC http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html ?
[15:06:14] *** m&m shows as "dnd" and his status message is "XSF Council"
[15:06:28] <Kev> I've just noticed a somwhat major problem with this.
[15:06:50] <MattJ> Oh?
[15:06:57] <Kev> Which is that if a user goes invisible, joins some MUCs and then goes visible those MUCs will never receive an unavailable.
[15:07:13] <Kev> "When the client becomes visible, the server MUST treat that state as equivalent to an active session before receiving initial presence from the client."
[15:07:16] <stpeter> hmm
[15:07:29] <Kev> So it's a trivial fix, I think, just that sentence needs a reword.
[15:07:39] <m&m> /nod
[15:08:14] <stpeter> if an invisible man enters a room, is he present? ;-)
[15:08:21] <MattJ> Yes and no
[15:08:38] <m&m> Schrodinger's occupant?
[15:08:42] <stpeter> heh
[15:08:43] <Tobias> hehe
[15:09:05] <Kev> So, I don't know if Peter wants to fix that up a bit before we issue Last Call, or after.
[15:09:18] <Kev> I'm easy.
[15:09:35] <stpeter> Kev: won't the MUC room receive unavailable if the now-visible man goes offline?
[15:09:48] <Kev> No, because the server's forgotten about the directed presence.
[15:09:55] <stpeter> oh, I see
[15:09:56] <stpeter> right
[15:10:00] <m&m> active != available
[15:10:13] <stpeter> same is true for all directed presence sent while invisible
[15:10:14] <stpeter> ok
[15:10:39] <Kev> Right. The MUC was an illustration because it's the most likely use of directed presence while invisible (he asserts, boldly).
[15:11:10] <stpeter> yeah, I will clean that up -- I assume we'd prefer to say that the server needs to add any directed presence JIDs to its list of entities it'll send unavail to
[15:11:21] <Kev> Right.
[15:11:27] <stpeter> prepopulate that list -- whatever we call it in RFC 6921
[15:11:46] <Kev> Want to do that pre-or-post-LC?
[15:11:46] <stpeter> er, 6121 ;-)
[15:12:00] <stpeter> no preference
[15:12:07] <stpeter> might as well do it right now
[15:12:13] <m&m> (-:
[15:12:13] <stpeter> or after this meeting :)
[15:12:17] <Kev> I'll +1 the LC in any case.
[15:12:19] <Kev> Everyone else?
[15:12:22] <Tobias> +1
[15:12:24] <m&m> also +1
[15:12:35] <m&m> it's far enough from IETF (-:
[15:12:54] <Kev> MattJ: ?
[15:13:10] <MattJ> Did anyone read my points about probes on the list?
[15:13:19] <Kev> MattJ: I haven't.
[15:13:20] <MattJ> As in, mainly I want them optional
[15:13:33] <Kev> Or, at least, I didn't notice it enough for it to stay in my inbox.
[15:13:33] <MattJ> and an optional flag in the protocol to enable/disable them
[15:13:59] <m&m> I don't recall either
[15:14:03] <MattJ> I can provide text for it, but do we want it pre-draft/LC?
[15:14:12] <Kev> MattJ: I don't think the XEP prohibits probes, does it?
[15:14:29] <MattJ> There are pros/cons each way regarding the sending of probes
[15:14:39] <MattJ> It depends how paranoid you are, and your reasons for invisibility
[15:14:43] <stpeter> I thought we concluded that the flag would make this little extension less simple than desired
[15:15:16] <MattJ> Fair enough if that really is the consensus
[15:15:33] <MattJ> Let's LC it, and I'll post my thoughts to the list
[15:15:34] <stpeter> well, feel free to raise the issue again
[15:15:39] <stpeter> ok
[15:15:49] <Kev> MattJ: I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense to add that to the XEP, although I'm not dead-set against it.
[15:16:07] <Kev> I note, though, that a server can allow the client to change whether it happens as part of the per-user ad-hoc configuration.
[15:16:13] <Kev> Assuming it has such a thing.
[15:16:19] <MattJ> Kev, if we don't add it, should the server default to sending or not sending probes?
[15:16:28] <Kev> (And the XEP gives leeway either way)
[15:16:33] <Kev> Implementation issue? :)
[15:16:36] <m&m> this sounds like a great discussion for the list, post LC
[15:16:42] <MattJ> Kev, not exactly :)
[15:17:05] <Kev> In any case, that's everyone present +1 on LC.
[15:17:06] <MattJ> Or two differing implementations will give invisible users very different behaviour
[15:17:12] <MattJ> But yes, +1 to LC and we'll discuss on-list
[15:17:17] <Kev> 3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/xml-media-element.html
Accept?
[15:17:40] <MattJ> I need to read it through, and I'll post to the list
[15:17:41] <m&m> I have further objections to publishing
[15:17:46] <m&m> er
[15:17:48] <m&m> no futhre
[15:17:50] <m&m> gah
[15:17:53] <m&m> no further
[15:17:56] <Kev> I've got assorted issues with it, but not enough to prevent it going on the vine.
[15:18:02] <m&m> exactly
[15:18:46] <Kev> Tobias: ?
[15:19:12] <Tobias> +1 for publishing as experimental and fixing remaining issues then
[15:19:35] <Kev> 4) Date of next meeting?
[15:19:49] <Kev> It'd be easier for me for it to not be next week, but I can possibly manage if we need it.
[15:19:51] <m&m> -1 to next week
[15:20:07] <MattJ> +0 to next week
[15:20:16] <Kev> Week after?
[15:20:17] <m&m> Us 'Murricans have a holiday
[15:20:25] <MattJ> Oh good
[15:20:30] <m&m> 7/11 works for me
[15:20:41] <m&m> and not just for Slurpees
[15:20:54] <Kev> Ah, yes, when we good British folks gave the Merkins a kind and thoughtful present of independence.
[15:20:56] <Tobias> that'd work for me
[15:20:58] <stpeter> Kev:

When the client becomes visible, the server MUST treat that state as equivalent to an active session before receiving initial presence from the client, with one exception: if the client sent directed presence to any entities while in the invisible state, the server MUST treat those entities as under point 2 of Section 4.6.3 of RFC 6121 (i.e., the server MUST ensure that it sends unavailable presence to those entities if the client subsequently goes offline after becoming visible).
[15:21:28] <Kev> stpeter: +1 on that text.
[15:21:34] <Kev> (Thanks)
[15:21:40] <stpeter> good catch
[15:21:52] <Kev> OK, so we've on for a fortnight ~now.
[15:21:54] <stpeter> I'll 0.11 shortly and then issue the LC
[15:21:58] <Kev> 5) AOB?
[15:22:15] <m&m> none from me
[15:22:24] <Tobias> no AOB from me either
[15:23:10] <Kev> Cool, all done then.
[15:23:11] <Kev> Thanks all
[15:23:15] *Kev bangs the gavel.
[15:23:21] <m&m> with plenty of time before my next meeting!
[15:23:21] <Tobias> thanks
[15:23:33] *m&m goes back to upsetting various working groups
[15:26:28] <m&m> oh wow … fippo actually posed to a list!
[15:26:32] *** m&m shows as "online"
[15:28:19] *** m&m shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[15:33:13] *** m&m shows as "online"
[15:35:19] *** m&m shows as "dnd" and his status message is "in a meeting!"
[15:43:05] *** m&m shows as "online"
[15:43:43] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "AFK for a few minutes"
[15:50:03] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[16:14:35] *** Tobias has left the room
[16:23:38] *** m&m shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[16:34:01] *** m&m shows as "online"
[16:57:11] *** Tobias has joined the room
[16:57:12] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[17:17:43] *** Tobias has left the room
[17:17:45] *** Tobias has joined the room
[17:17:46] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[17:23:24] *** m&m shows as "away" and his status message is "stuffage"
[17:28:51] *** m&m shows as "online"
[17:32:48] *** m&m shows as "dnd" and his status message is "in a meeting!"
[17:47:37] *** Zash has joined the room
[17:47:38] *** Zash shows as "online"
[17:56:39] *** Kev shows as "away"
[18:06:20] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "lunch"
[18:24:51] *** Kev shows as "online"
[18:40:16] *** Kev shows as "away"
[18:53:02] *** Kooda shows as "xa" and his status message is "téléphone"
[18:57:27] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[19:03:21] *** Kooda shows as "online"
[19:09:08] *** Tobias has left the room
[19:09:09] *** Tobias has joined the room
[19:09:10] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[19:32:55] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "working AFK on i18n stuff"
[19:45:42] *** m&m has left the room
[19:46:27] *** m&m has joined the room
[19:47:20] *** m&m has left the room
[19:48:13] *** m&m has joined the room
[20:10:48] *** Zash shows as "online"
[20:10:49] *** Zash shows as "online"
[20:11:10] *** Zash has left the room
[20:17:38] *** m&m has left the room
[20:22:30] *** m&m has joined the room
[20:26:07] *** m&m has left the room
[20:26:07] *** m&m has joined the room
[20:41:33] *** Kev shows as "online"
[21:01:34] *** m&m has left the room
[21:02:45] *** stpeter shows as "dnd" and his status message is "on a conference call"
[21:03:50] *** Kev shows as "away"
[21:46:04] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "AFK working on i18n stuff"
[22:02:31] *** Kooda shows as "away" and his status message is "dodo"
[22:05:49] *** bear has joined the room
[22:06:37] *** bear has left the room
[23:16:57] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "cooking and such"