XSF logo XMPP Council - 2012-07-25


  1. stpeter has left
  2. bear has joined
  3. bear has left
  4. m&m has left
  5. Kev has joined
  6. Tobias has joined
  7. Tobias has left
  8. Tobias has left
  9. Tobias has joined
  10. Tobias has left
  11. Tobias has joined
  12. Tobias has left
  13. Tobias has left
  14. Tobias has left
  15. m&m has joined
  16. Zash has joined
  17. Tobias has joined
  18. Tobias has left
  19. Tobias has joined
  20. Tobias has left
  21. Tobias has joined
  22. m&m t - 05:00
  23. Kev Yep, ta.
  24. Kev Just finished some (internal) patch review ready.
  25. m&m that was mostly a self check (-:
  26. Kev This week is a killer. Got lots on at work, plus 301 is absolutely deadly.
  27. m&m dude
  28. m&m I still haven't finished my slides for next week
  29. Kev That's /next/ week :)
  30. m&m yes, but the chairs need them "now"
  31. m&m d-:
  32. Kev Oh well. Once you've got those done you can review 301 :)
  33. m&m I was planning to review that on the plane
  34. MattJ has joined
  35. m&m I started to Sunday, and decided I'd rather enjoy my weekend (-:
  36. Kev Hope you get the 0.6 version.
  37. m&m me, too
  38. m&m I don't leave until 15:00 Saturday, so there's time
  39. m&m ding ding ding
  40. Kev Righty.
  41. Kev 1) Roll call
  42. Kev I'm here!
  43. Kev Physically.
  44. m&m what, you go all TRON on us?
  45. m&m presente
  46. Kev MattJ, Tobias: *ping*
  47. MattJ Present
  48. Tobias pong
  49. Tobias present
  50. Kev Ralph has been pinged.
  51. Kev 2) XHTML-IM: Issue call for experience? (For move to Final)
  52. m&m +1
  53. Florob has joined
  54. Tobias +1
  55. Kev I'm +1, although someone needs to present two implementations to us :)
  56. m&m heh
  57. MattJ +1
  58. m&m There's Exodus (-:
  59. Tobias psi does also xhtml-im
  60. Tobias IIRC
  61. MattJ Pidgin, Gajim, etc.
  62. Zash and Gajim
  63. Kev Tobias: I don't think that's true. I think it /renders/ it, but won't produce it.
  64. MattJ Pandion, iChat!
  65. m&m there's a bunch of clients
  66. MattJ Kev, it can produce
  67. m&m Adium also does it, at least every other version
  68. Kev And how many of these are actually doing -71, rather than just shoving junk in the namespace? :)
  69. Kev MattJ: Are you sure? I'd think I'd remember something like that.
  70. Kev Although possibly not.
  71. Kev Anyway.
  72. Kev 3) XEP-0308 (Correction) - Last Call? (For Draft)
  73. MattJ Gajim says pink
  74. m&m Given the discussion, I'd like to see 0.6 come out first
  75. m&m (re 308)
  76. Kev m&m: Are you sure you're on the right item?
  77. m&m /sigh
  78. MattJ Do we have two implementations?
  79. m&m no (-:
  80. Kev MattJ: Swift and Jitsi.
  81. m&m no objections to −308 LC
  82. MattJ Ah, forgot Jitsi
  83. MattJ Yeah, I'm fine with LC
  84. Tobias im fine with it too
  85. Kev 4) XEP-0301 (RTT) - LC (for Draft)? Now, for this I suggested that given the possibly significant changes to come out of the discussion of my review, we ask Council to approve the LC in advance, ready for it to be issued on 0.6.
  86. MattJ I'm fine with that
  87. m&m I'm fine with that
  88. m&m heh
  89. Kev I don't know if people are happy with that, but it seems a sensible approach to me (Mark seems to be in a rush and all, and I expect we won't Council next week).
  90. MattJ heh
  91. ralphm has joined
  92. Kev Evening Ralph.
  93. m&m we need a jinx protocol extension
  94. ralphm hi
  95. ralphm no objection to 0308 LC
  96. Tobias on XEP-0301: +1 on LC for draft
  97. Kev (I do note that LCing 301 when it's in such a state of flux and seemingly so far off community consensus feels like a cheat - although expedient if we want these long-term specs using XMPP)
  98. ralphm Kev: I'm ok with a LC on 301, although I don't understand the urgency.
  99. MattJ Don't try :)
  100. ralphm I do know that the discussion is flooding the list
  101. Kev ralphm: As I understand it, there are long-life specs under consideration elsewhere (for emergency services and things) whereby they'd like to use XMPP-RTT, but can't have an Experimental XEP in there.
  102. Kev Which seems like a borderline acceptable reason to me, but I'm trying to support them as best I can.
  103. m&m /nod
  104. ralphm if it is just for the label, well, ok
  105. m&m layer 9 interjected into layer 7
  106. Kev Right.
  107. Kev So, that's everything I had on my agenda list thing.
  108. Kev 5) Date of next meeting.
  109. Kev Fortnight?
  110. m&m WFM
  111. MattJ wfm
  112. Tobias fine with that
  113. Kev ralphm:?
  114. Kev I'll take that as a yes :)
  115. Kev 6) Any other business?
  116. MattJ Not here
  117. MattJ Wait
  118. m&m just a note that IETF is next week
  119. MattJ 297?
  120. ralphm wfm
  121. Kev m&m: That's why I proposed skipping a week.
  122. Kev MattJ: I wanted to give that a check-over before LCing it, if that's OK>
  123. MattJ Sure, np
  124. Kev Unless that one's urgent.
  125. m&m meeting is at 15:20-07:00 on 07/31
  126. m&m XMPP WG meeting that is
  127. MattJ Kev, not at all, you just said on the list you were +1 to LC :)
  128. Kev Yeah, that time's not going to happen to me.
  129. m&m (-:
  130. Kev MattJ: I think I said I wasn't opposed, didn't I?
  131. m&m just letting everyone know (-:
  132. Kev Yeah, ta.
  133. MattJ Kev, ok, if they're different... :)
  134. Kev But anything that close to midnight can get in line somewhere after sleep.
  135. Kev MattJ: I'm not opposed to the thought, but I'd like to check it first :)
  136. MattJ :)
  137. Kev Anything else?
  138. m&m re 297, I'd like to see the new revision before non-objecting to its LC
  139. m&m since we're not dealing with layer 9 issues there (-:
  140. m&m nothing else from me
  141. MattJ m&m, you too? You proposed the LC...
  142. ralphm nodss
  143. ralphm -s
  144. m&m well, If Kev says there's a new revision coming, then I want to hold off
  145. MattJ No, just that he's going to review the current one
  146. Kev I didn't know there was a new revision coming.
  147. m&m heh
  148. m&m my reading comprehension is down today
  149. m&m /sigh
  150. Kev Cool, I think we're done.
  151. Kev Thanks all, minutes to follow.
  152. m&m well, I'm pre-emptively non-objecting to LCing the current −297
  153. MattJ Thanks
  154. MattJ m&m, I think this pre-non-objecting could be going somewhere :)
  155. Kev MattJ: We've done it in the past.
  156. m&m its like antidisestablishmentarianism
  157. Kev Many times.
  158. Kev m&m: Yes, only completely different :)
  159. m&m (-:
  160. Kev bangs the gavel.
  161. m&m goes off to figure out how to fake intelligence for the rest of today
  162. MattJ If I can manage, I'm sure you can't go far wrong
  163. m&m we'll see how it goes
  164. Tobias has left
  165. Florob has left
  166. Tobias has joined
  167. Tobias has joined
  168. m&m has left
  169. m&m has joined
  170. MattJ has left
  171. m&m has left
  172. m&m has joined
  173. Kev has left
  174. Tobias has left
  175. Kev has joined
  176. Tobias has joined
  177. Neustradamus has joined
  178. m&m has left
  179. ralphm has left
  180. Zash has left
  181. Zash has joined