XMPP Council - 2014-02-26

By my reckoning (the editor team haven't responded to me asking if we're supposed to be voting on BOSH), our agenda today is roughly Roll/Date/AOB.

love those short meetings :-)

bbiaf

https://gist.github.com/jamesvnz/6756208 -- this makes me wonder if they seriously abuse the type attribute...

oi!

ah... they don't -- https://developer.android.com/google/gcm/ccs.html

Hola.

hi

1) Are we rolls?

I'm here.

here

Here

here

And fippo's obviously not here, as he was talking a moment ago.

fippooooooooooooooo

errr... yes

Assuming I'm right about not having more stuff.

2) Date of next.

I can't do next Wednesday

Hmm, not sure yet if I can

Can skip a week, move it, or have it without me.

I'd be inclined to skip a week, given IETF.

wfm

the skipping

skip it

the skippening

wfm to skip

Excellent.

3) AOB?

None here

I have one item to bring up

if I may

I note, not as directly business, that the Editors are now functional.

Can I ask the COuncil members in particular to look at my XEP-0001 change proposal?

m&m: Shoot.

Dave Cridland: Oh, about that, I note that Council /do/ vote on Humerous generally.

They just do it by pre-approving whatever the author is going to say.

Which is obviously a nonsense. But I don't see a reason to change it.

historically, we had a page that collected all of the protocols, and provided short information block on them

http://xmpp.org/protocols

however, that page (and its children) haven't been updated in several months — possibly years

probably years

so my question is, does the council see value in keeping it?

A list of registered namespaces seems worthwhile. Pointing to the XEPs in which they're registered seems worthwhile. More than that seems not, to me.

Is this from when we had pages at jabber.org/protocol/*?

Oh... So this probably made more sense when we used the http://jabber.org/protocol namespace.

MattJ: Yes.

yes

To be honest it would be nice if we could preserve those links, but not necessary

Speaking from the floor, while the XMPP Registrar certainly needs to maintain a list of allocated namespaces, I see no particular reason for anyone else to dictate its form.

we already have the registrar list

as I recall, the http://jabber.org/protocol/* namespaces all had pages like this and then we had redirects in place to point those to these pages at xmpp.org

this is, in some sense, duplicate information

m&m: yes

m&m: I think this was a straw poll rather than a Council action, right?

m&m: And that we've now done that?

it is, yes

well, I'm inclined to remove the landing page, and leave the existing directories in place

at least for http://jabber.org/protocol/* links

but not do any other updates

This seems sensible to me.

m&m: Happy that we're done?

+1

grazie

Kev, As for Humorous XEPs, I didn't *think* Coucil approved them in any meaningful sense. I couldn't remember voting on any, certainly. I'm happy with whatever; as usual I'm more interested in documenting what is done here.

AOAOB?

+1

none here

Dave Cridland: I remember voting on them, but only in a loose sense. I'm vaguely opposed to introducing a new approving body.

Dave Cridland: the Editor would send them to the Council members (off-list, to retain some element of surprise)

I think this is outside Council discussion, so let's carry on after.

Kev, OK. Please post that to the list; it'll spark some debate.

nod

I think we're done with Council.

Thanks all

thank you

thanks!

Dave Cridland: Yes, I'll look at them more thoroughly (like, at all), and post to the list.

Thanks

Lance, you've suggested adding tags/keyworks to XEPs, right?

i have no memory of it, but it would be nice to group them, yes

yeah..seems sensible, so what kind of groups did you have in mind?

just to get a rough idea

pubsub, jingle, muc to start

c2s, s2s, im, presence, pubsub, muc, jingle would be the ones that come to my mind

ah..yeah..those seem to make sense

i'd like a very subjective 'this is a minimum you need to use to be a modern xmpp client', but that might be too subjective unless we do a compliance suite for it first

just something to avoid listing ~400 xeps at once when someone first lands on the page

right

Wouldn't that be the compliance suites?

it sure would ease getting an overview...i'll see what i can do to integrate that in our publishing system

Zash presumably, yes. it would be nice to make the xep list filterable by those suites

oh that's right we need to update the compliance suite(s) document

fippo: editors of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna want your feedback posted to xmpp@ietf.org!

they want you, NOW! ... maybe they'll even hang posters on the walls

ooo … that's a thought

m&m: actually that reminds me that I promised peter to re-review https://github.com/linuxwolf/xmpp-fed/pull/1

right