XMPP Council - 2018-01-10


  1. SouL has left
  2. Ge0rG has left
  3. SouL has left
  4. Ge0rG has left
  5. Dave has left
  6. Dave has joined
  7. vanitasvitae has left
  8. SouL has left
  9. Ge0rG has left
  10. SouL has left
  11. Ge0rG has left
  12. Dave has left
  13. Dave has joined
  14. jere has joined
  15. SouL has left
  16. Ge0rG has left
  17. Ge0rG has left
  18. Dave has left
  19. Dave has joined
  20. Dave has left
  21. SouL has left
  22. Dave has joined
  23. SouL has left
  24. Ge0rG has left
  25. daniel has joined
  26. jere has left
  27. SouL has left
  28. Ge0rG has left
  29. Dave has left
  30. Dave has joined
  31. SamWhited has left
  32. jere has joined
  33. Tobias has joined
  34. Ge0rG has left
  35. SouL has left
  36. Tobias has joined
  37. SouL has left
  38. Ge0rG has left
  39. Dave has left
  40. Dave has joined
  41. Dave has left
  42. Dave has joined
  43. SamWhited has left
  44. SouL has left
  45. Ge0rG has left
  46. Dave has left
  47. Dave has joined
  48. Dave has left
  49. Dave has joined
  50. SouL has left
  51. Ge0rG has left
  52. SouL has left
  53. Ge0rG has left
  54. Dave has left
  55. Dave has joined
  56. Ge0rG has left
  57. SouL has left
  58. Dave has left
  59. Dave has joined
  60. Dave has left
  61. Dave has joined
  62. SouL has joined
  63. Ge0rG has left
  64. Ge0rG has left
  65. Dave has left
  66. Dave has joined
  67. Ge0rG has left
  68. Ge0rG has left
  69. Ge0rG has left
  70. Dave has left
  71. Dave has joined
  72. Ge0rG has left
  73. Dave has left
  74. Dave has joined
  75. Ge0rG has left
  76. Dave has left
  77. Dave has joined
  78. Dave has left
  79. Dave has joined
  80. Ge0rG has left
  81. Dave has left
  82. Dave has joined
  83. Dave has left
  84. Dave has joined
  85. Ge0rG has left
  86. Ge0rG has left
  87. Dave has left
  88. Dave has joined
  89. Dave has left
  90. Dave has joined
  91. Tobias has left
  92. Ge0rG has left
  93. Tobias has joined
  94. Dave has left
  95. Dave has joined
  96. Ge0rG has left
  97. Dave has left
  98. Dave has joined
  99. Dave has left
  100. Dave has joined
  101. Ge0rG has left
  102. Ge0rG has left
  103. Dave has left
  104. Dave has joined
  105. Dave has left
  106. Dave has joined
  107. ralphm has left
  108. Ge0rG has left
  109. ralphm has left
  110. ralphm has joined
  111. Ge0rG has left
  112. Dave has left
  113. Dave has joined
  114. Zash has left
  115. Dave has left
  116. Zash has left
  117. Dave has joined
  118. Zash has joined
  119. daniel has left
  120. daniel has joined
  121. Ge0rG has left
  122. daniel has left
  123. daniel has joined
  124. Dave has left
  125. Dave has joined
  126. Dave has left
  127. Dave has joined
  128. daniel has left
  129. daniel has joined
  130. Ge0rG has left
  131. Dave has left
  132. Dave has joined
  133. Dave has left
  134. Dave has joined
  135. Dave has left
  136. Dave has joined
  137. jonasw has left
  138. jonasw has joined
  139. ralphm has joined
  140. Ge0rG has left
  141. Dave has left
  142. Dave has joined
  143. daniel has left
  144. daniel has joined
  145. Ge0rG has left
  146. daniel has left
  147. daniel has left
  148. Dave has left
  149. Dave has joined
  150. daniel has left
  151. daniel has joined
  152. Dave has left
  153. Dave has joined
  154. Ge0rG has left
  155. Dave has left
  156. Dave has joined
  157. Ge0rG has left
  158. ralphm has joined
  159. ralphm has left
  160. Ge0rG has left
  161. Zash has left
  162. Ge0rG has left
  163. daniel has left
  164. daniel has joined
  165. Ge0rG has left
  166. Dave has left
  167. Dave has joined
  168. Dave has left
  169. Dave has joined
  170. ralphm has joined
  171. Ge0rG has left
  172. Ge0rG has left
  173. daniel has left
  174. Dave has left
  175. Dave has joined
  176. ralphm has left
  177. Ge0rG has left
  178. daniel has joined
  179. Ge0rG has left
  180. Dave has left
  181. Dave has joined
  182. ralphm has left
  183. Dave has left
  184. Dave has joined
  185. jere has joined
  186. jere has joined
  187. Ge0rG has left
  188. Flow has joined
  189. Zash has left
  190. Ge0rG has left
  191. Dave has left
  192. Dave has left
  193. Ge0rG has left
  194. ralphm has left
  195. Kev has left
  196. Kev has left
  197. daniel has left
  198. daniel has joined
  199. Ge0rG has left
  200. Dave has left
  201. ralphm has left
  202. genofire has joined
  203. genofire has joined
  204. Ge0rG has left
  205. genofire has joined
  206. genofire has joined
  207. genofire has joined
  208. genofire has joined
  209. Link Mauve has left
  210. genofire has joined
  211. genofire has joined
  212. genofire has joined
  213. genofire has joined
  214. genofire has joined
  215. genofire has joined
  216. genofire has joined
  217. genofire has joined
  218. genofire has joined
  219. genofire has joined
  220. genofire has joined
  221. genofire has joined
  222. genofire has joined
  223. genofire has joined
  224. genofire has joined
  225. genofire has joined
  226. genofire has joined
  227. genofire has joined
  228. genofire has joined
  229. genofire has joined
  230. genofire has joined
  231. genofire has joined
  232. genofire has joined
  233. genofire has joined
  234. genofire has joined
  235. genofire has joined
  236. genofire has joined
  237. genofire has joined
  238. genofire has joined
  239. genofire has joined
  240. genofire has joined
  241. genofire has joined
  242. genofire has joined
  243. genofire has joined
  244. genofire has joined
  245. genofire has joined
  246. genofire has joined
  247. genofire has joined
  248. genofire has joined
  249. genofire has joined
  250. Link Mauve has joined
  251. genofire has joined
  252. genofire has joined
  253. genofire has joined
  254. genofire has joined
  255. genofire has joined
  256. ralphm has joined
  257. genofire has joined
  258. genofire has joined
  259. genofire has joined
  260. genofire has joined
  261. Ge0rG has left
  262. genofire has joined
  263. genofire has joined
  264. genofire has joined
  265. genofire has joined
  266. genofire has joined
  267. genofire has joined
  268. genofire has joined
  269. ralphm has joined
  270. Dave has left
  271. Link Mauve has left
  272. vanitasvitae has joined
  273. Ge0rG has left
  274. Link Mauve has joined
  275. ralphm has joined
  276. Ge0rG has left
  277. Dave has left
  278. Dave has left
  279. daniel has left
  280. Ge0rG has left
  281. daniel has joined
  282. Kev has left
  283. daniel has left
  284. daniel has joined
  285. ralphm has joined
  286. Ge0rG has left
  287. Dave has left
  288. daniel has left
  289. daniel has joined
  290. Ge0rG has left
  291. ralphm has left
  292. daniel has left
  293. daniel has joined
  294. Ge0rG has left
  295. daniel has left
  296. daniel has joined
  297. daniel has left
  298. daniel has joined
  299. Dave has left
  300. Holger has left
  301. ralphm has joined
  302. Holger has joined
  303. Ge0rG has left
  304. ralphm has left
  305. ralphm has joined
  306. jere has left
  307. jere has joined
  308. moparisthebest has joined
  309. Ge0rG has left
  310. daniel has left
  311. moparisthebest has joined
  312. moparisthebest has joined
  313. daniel has joined
  314. ralphm has joined
  315. Dave has left
  316. Dave has left
  317. ralphm has joined
  318. daniel has left
  319. Dave has left
  320. Ge0rG has left
  321. ralphm has left
  322. daniel has joined
  323. ralphm has joined
  324. Ge0rG has left
  325. Kev https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/client-key.html would probably benefit from renaming as well.
  326. Zash Naming things
  327. Ge0rG Like user-invite?
  328. Dave Kev, Renaming?
  329. Kev I would expect a client to submit an automatically generated name for themselves in most instances, but have the user able to rename things in the event that they have, for example, two devices with Swift for iOS on.
  330. Kev That's how these things have typically worked in my limited experience.
  331. Kev Last-used is also useful in these instances.
  332. Ge0rG Kev: oh, renaming the client name.
  333. Ge0rG It might also make sense to differentiate long-term CLIENT-KEYs from short-term ones for resumption.
  334. Ge0rG It will be very confusing if a client name is present twice, with different keys, one for 24h and another for 30d.
  335. Holger has left
  336. Holger has joined
  337. Ge0rG If you read the proto-XEP in an unfortunate scrolling position, §3.2 reads like "Kev Revocation"
  338. Ge0rG has left
  339. Dave You can revoke Kev, but he has a TTL as well, as do we all.
  340. ralphm has joined
  341. Ge0rG has left
  342. Holger has joined
  343. Ge0rG has left
  344. Dave has left
  345. Dave has left
  346. ralphm has joined
  347. daniel has left
  348. genofire has joined
  349. ralphm has joined
  350. Ge0rG has left
  351. ralphm has left
  352. jere has joined
  353. genofire has joined
  354. Ge0rG has left
  355. Dave has left
  356. ralphm has joined
  357. daniel has left
  358. Dave Are we sitting comfortably?
  359. Ge0rG Yes, sir!
  360. Kev Then let's begin.
  361. Dave Kev, Glad someone got that. :-)
  362. Dave 1) Role Call - Who's here?
  363. Kev I seem to be.
  364. daniel here
  365. Dave SamWhited, ?
  366. Ge0rG still here
  367. Ge0rG has left
  368. Dave Green-ness from SamWhited but no response, so I'll assume absence for now.
  369. Dave We'll move on...
  370. Dave 2) Agenda
  371. Dave As emailed, but we have one additional ProtoXEP to consider.
  372. Kev I suggest we don't, actually.
  373. SamWhited here now, sorry about that
  374. Dave As far as I can tell from the rules, I should open that vote now, but I'm happy to defer it if we think we ought to?
  375. Kev In as much as if we want to encourage people to be voting in meeting, rather than onlist (and I think we do), slipping things into the agenda without notice is counter to that.
  376. Ge0rG Dave: you skipped the initial #2 from your agenda email.
  377. Dave Ge0rG, I'm renumbering, sorry.
  378. daniel has left
  379. genofire has joined
  380. Ge0rG I have no strong opinions on hurrying my and MArc's protoXEP. It wasn't even yet officially announced to the ML.
  381. genofire has joined
  382. genofire has joined
  383. genofire has joined
  384. Dave Kev, If everyone's happy with that, we can push it off until next week.
  385. jonasw (it will be once the mailman passes my mail through; I sent it just now)
  386. genofire has joined
  387. Dave Ge0rG, Oh, in which case it's missed this meeting, so perfect.
  388. genofire has joined
  389. Kev (When I'll probably be on the road and will have to onlist anyway, unhelpfully)
  390. Dave So, moving on.
  391. genofire has joined
  392. genofire has joined
  393. Dave 3) Did everyone have a nice Christmas?
  394. Kev So, long story...
  395. genofire has joined
  396. genofire has joined
  397. genofire has joined
  398. genofire has joined
  399. genofire has joined
  400. Kev But for the sake of brevity, yes thank you.
  401. Ge0rG Yes, without further detail.
  402. genofire has joined
  403. genofire has joined
  404. SamWhited On list.
  405. genofire has joined
  406. Dave 4) ProtoXEP: PEP Avatar to vCard conversion.
  407. SamWhited ahem, I mean, "yes, thank you"
  408. genofire has joined
  409. Kev https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pep-vcard-conversion.html
  410. genofire has joined
  411. genofire has joined
  412. Dave Kev, Thanks.
  413. Ge0rG on list
  414. Kev I've got a few quibbles with this that I'll try to send out on standards@, but nothing to block publication.
  415. SamWhited +1
  416. genofire has joined
  417. Kev (+1)
  418. genofire has joined
  419. daniel +1
  420. genofire has joined
  421. Dave +1 from me.
  422. genofire has joined
  423. genofire has joined
  424. Dave I read that as everyone +1, and an on list from Ge0rG.
  425. genofire has joined
  426. Kev Yes.
  427. genofire has joined
  428. genofire has joined
  429. genofire has joined
  430. Dave 5) Client Key Support: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/client-key.html
  431. Dave I'm obviously +1.
  432. genofire has joined
  433. genofire has joined
  434. Kev Could do with some extra stuff, I think, mentioned earlier, but good for publication. +1
  435. genofire has joined
  436. genofire has joined
  437. genofire has joined
  438. genofire has joined
  439. Ge0rG +1, even though we need to put some more thought into the network-interruption-during-auth issue.
  440. SamWhited +1
  441. genofire has joined
  442. genofire has joined
  443. genofire has joined
  444. genofire has joined
  445. Dave daniel, ?
  446. genofire has joined
  447. daniel on list
  448. genofire has joined
  449. genofire has joined
  450. genofire has joined
  451. genofire has joined
  452. Dave Thanks.
  453. genofire has joined
  454. genofire has joined
  455. genofire has joined
  456. Dave 6) TOTP 2FA - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/totp-2fa.html
  457. Kev +1
  458. Ge0rG on list.
  459. daniel on list as well
  460. genofire has joined
  461. Dave +1 from me too.
  462. genofire has joined
  463. SamWhited on list
  464. genofire has joined
  465. genofire has joined
  466. genofire has joined
  467. Kev I do think client-key needs examples of it being used.
  468. genofire has joined
  469. genofire has joined
  470. genofire has joined
  471. genofire has joined
  472. Ge0rG Kev: examples in the XEP text?
  473. Kev Yes.
  474. genofire has joined
  475. Dave Kev, Yeah, I agree. Needs examples in the I-D too.
  476. genofire has joined
  477. Dave Kev, Same with TOTP.
  478. genofire has joined
  479. genofire has joined
  480. genofire has joined
  481. genofire has joined
  482. genofire has joined
  483. genofire has joined
  484. Dave 7) Deprecate XEP-0126: Invisibility
  485. genofire has joined
  486. Kev What was the background to this proposal?
  487. genofire has joined
  488. Kev (I'm almost certainly +1, but just for flavour...)
  489. genofire has joined
  490. Dave I'm +1 for this, we should be advising people to do invisibility via Privacy Lists anymore.
  491. genofire has joined
  492. genofire has joined
  493. Kev Insert negation of choice.
  494. genofire has joined
  495. genofire has joined
  496. Dave Kev, I assumed this was SamWhited's general push toward deprecating old stuff.
  497. genofire has joined
  498. Dave Kev, And yes. Shouldn't be advising.
  499. Dave has left
  500. genofire has joined
  501. Dave has left
  502. SamWhited Yah, background is that privacy lists are deprecated and there are multiple ways to do invisibility which is confusing (I had this specifically brought up at a meetup by some random people)
  503. genofire has joined
  504. genofire has joined
  505. Kev +1
  506. SamWhited +1
  507. genofire has joined
  508. Ge0rG What is the encouraged way to do invisibility?
  509. genofire has joined
  510. genofire has joined
  511. Kev Ge0rG: With a cloak from Hogwarts.
  512. genofire has joined
  513. Dave Ge0rG, XEP-0186 from memory. I may have the number wrong, but it's somewhere around there.
  514. genofire has joined
  515. daniel +1
  516. genofire has joined
  517. Ge0rG Kev: that can be circumvented with the Marauder's Map.
  518. SamWhited Ge0rG: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html
  519. Kev https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0186.html
  520. genofire has joined
  521. genofire has joined
  522. Dave Kev, Did I mention that Hogwart's is being closed? Or at least, the Great Hall part of it?
  523. genofire has joined
  524. Dave But anyway.
  525. genofire has joined
  526. genofire has joined
  527. genofire has joined
  528. Dave I see a +1 from everyone except Ge0rG.
  529. genofire has joined
  530. Ge0rG I suppose this is an "on list" from me then, I don't want to rush things without skimming through both XEPs
  531. genofire has joined
  532. genofire has joined
  533. genofire has joined
  534. genofire has joined
  535. genofire has joined
  536. genofire has joined
  537. genofire has joined
  538. genofire has joined
  539. genofire has joined
  540. genofire has joined
  541. Dave 8) Trello Tidy
  542. genofire has joined
  543. Ge0rG has left
  544. genofire has joined
  545. genofire has joined
  546. Dave A few things in Trello I'm not clear about the status of:
  547. genofire has joined
  548. genofire has joined
  549. genofire has joined
  550. Ge0rG BTW, who is taking notes?
  551. Dave a) There's a bunch of stuff in Pending that I think has expired and/or been voted on.
  552. genofire has joined
  553. Dave Ge0rG, Yeah, nobody volunteered so I'll write something up later.
  554. Ge0rG Dave: thanks
  555. Ge0rG Are pep-vcard-conversion and "Deprecating 84" in conflict?
  556. SamWhited Yes, but even if we decide to deprecate one of the avatar formats I don't think it hurts to have the informational work around available for a while
  557. Dave In particular, I think we were bound by rules to repeat the Last Call for XEP-0387, but I don't see that as having happened.
  558. Dave has left
  559. Dave But also, people have continued commenting on the previous Last Call thread.
  560. SamWhited I am not interested in addressing feedback that came in after the last call was over. Forcing it to be restarted and never getting this out the door is starting to drive me mad. Feedback will be addressed in a future version (lots of it is very good), but not in this one unless someone else wants to take over.
  561. Ge0rG The Last-but-one Call?
  562. Dave SamWhited, I'm fine with that.
  563. Dave SamWhited, I'm just trying to figure out if we can actually vote it through at this point.
  564. Ge0rG According to my mail log, the last Last Call was going from December 7th to December 21st, and there was no feedback after December 11th.
  565. Dave Ge0rG, I can't find that Last Call announced on the mailing list, which is my problem. Was it?
  566. Dave Oh, wait, yes it was.
  567. Dave Title changed, of course.
  568. Ge0rG Dave: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-December/034019.html
  569. Dave So yes, we *can* vote on this (and I should have put it on the agenda, sorry)
  570. Ge0rG So while the discussion was under the Last-but-one Call email thread, I don't think the content should be ignored.
  571. Kev We can vote, but I don't think the feedback there has been incorporated as of yet.
  572. SamWhited It will be incorporated in the 2019 suites since it came in after the LC had ended.
  573. Kev https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-December/034019.html - that last call?
  574. Ge0rG SamWhited: are you speaking of the October LC?
  575. Dave SamWhited, No, looks like there was a Last Call open at the time.
  576. SamWhited I don't recall. I'm reasonably sure I had all feedback addressed, then the council changed before the voting was finished and now we have another LC and more feedback.
  577. Dave SamWhited, Sounds about right. Can you incorporate that feedback and we'll vote (and hopfully publish) next week?
  578. Kev I think that flow of events is correct, but the implication that the more recent feedback doesn't need addressing doesn't seem right to me.
  579. SamWhited No, I would like us to vote on the current form. We can address anything else remaining in next years.
  580. Kev That seems to be a sake of process for the sake of process.
  581. Ge0rG SamWhited: are you going to keep a list of open feedback items for next year's Compliance Suite?
  582. SamWhited I disagree, restarting the LC seems to be process for the sake of process
  583. SamWhited I just want compliance suites to actually exist in the year that is in the title.
  584. Ge0rG I don't know, without re-reading the whole thread and the XEP, which feedback is still pending and needs to be carried over into 2019.
  585. Kev I mean issuing a vote when you already know that one of Council has outstanding feedback that isn't getting addressed seems to be a redundant action.
  586. Kev If I issue a PR to address my feedback, does that make this any easier?
  587. Kev Not that I have any spare cycles.
  588. daniel has left
  589. SamWhited No, it doesn't, the point is to not go through multiple more weeks with multiple more changes which will just lead to more people having disagreements and more revisions. At some point we just have to say "this is good enough for this year". That *should* have happened before this year started, and it was on track to, then an excuse was made to continue putting it off and submit feedback late.
  590. Ge0rG has left
  591. Kev The way I see this, me being on Council requires me to do a thorough review of it before advancement. I did that, and found stuff that needs addressing. Whether that was given during the renewed LC, or at vote time, doesn't change that. But doing it during LC gives the opportunity to address it before the vote.
  592. Dave SamWhited, Yes, we do have to decide when to say it's good enough. And it's Council that does that, via the process in XEP-0001. I don't think ignoring feedback is a solution here.
  593. Dave ANyway, we're running out of time, so I'll move on for now.
  594. Ge0rG Kev: if your feedback is not incorporated before the vote, does that imply a -1?
  595. Dave I think we'll skip to:
  596. Kev Ge0rG: Well, yes. Unless the discussion leads to my feedback being wrong-or-such.
  597. Dave 9) AOB
  598. Ge0rG Maybe we can arrange for a vote of the XEP as-is, _now_, and have Kev make the PR and Sam start a "Compliance Suite 2019" with the feedback incorporated in the next weeks?
  599. Kev No real AOB here. I'll send out a request for agenda for the Summit shortly, but nothing much for Council to do about that.
  600. Ge0rG We've had a Council re-election and holiday season block progress for some time already.
  601. daniel AOB: publish-options
  602. daniel can we vote on one of the PRs
  603. daniel preferably the latest one
  604. Dave daniel, We can; I saw these were voted on, but the vote was deferred for more feedback from the list - but I didn't see any discussion there.
  605. Ge0rG daniel: IIRC you wanted to ask for comments from the community?
  606. Ge0rG As I lack experience with pubsub and understanding of the complexities of 0060, I'd like to hear from parties implementing this and/or impacted by the change.
  607. daniel Ge0rG, i wanted to ask for comments? i already did. that was mostly ignored. so i assume people either don't care or it's 'above their heads'/the don't have an opinion on that
  608. daniel not sure how waiting longer or bumping the thread will be any help
  609. daniel at some point council will have to make a decision
  610. daniel as you can't force 'the community' to have an opinion on that
  611. Dave daniel, OK, but the vote was explicitly deferred in order to gain feedback. Hence I didn't put it on this week's agenda.
  612. genofire has joined
  613. Ge0rG I don't know of PubSub implementations outside of the ones represented by xsf@ lurkers.
  614. genofire has joined
  615. daniel Dave, how would you like me to gather feedback then?
  616. genofire has joined
  617. genofire has joined
  618. Dave daniel, If you're asking for a vote in the absence of community feedback, I think I'd want to vote on-list to find the time to really study these in any case.
  619. genofire has joined
  620. genofire has joined
  621. genofire has joined
  622. genofire has joined
  623. Dave daniel, I'm not - I wasn't in that meeting. I'm just going by the decision made in my absence. Let's vote on this next week, feedback or not.
  624. genofire has joined
  625. Ge0rG Do we have council members who are working on affected implementations, besides of daniel?
  626. genofire has joined
  627. Kev I think anything in AOB that's going to need Council to do reading to get context in their heads is going to result on on-list at best, so may as well be a formal item in the following meeting. But I can onlist.
  628. genofire has joined
  629. Kev Ge0rG: All pubsub implementations are affected, I think. So yes.
  630. genofire has joined
  631. genofire has joined
  632. genofire has joined
  633. Ge0rG Kev: it would be great to have feedback from those Council members, then. On list.
  634. daniel Dave, i'm more than fine with council members taking their time. i just want them to take that time and not prolong this for ages
  635. genofire has joined
  636. genofire has joined
  637. SamWhited I'm all for voting on list, this meeting or next. I don't think we're going to get any community feedback on this as XEP-0060 is just too complicated and very few people understand it and even fewer have implemented it.
  638. genofire has joined
  639. genofire has joined
  640. daniel or come up with a strategy to gather feedback from people who work with pubsub
  641. Dave daniel, It'll be on next week. That's the first of the XEP-0060 trello cards, is it?
  642. genofire has joined
  643. genofire has joined
  644. daniel ok
  645. genofire has joined
  646. genofire has joined
  647. Dave So:
  648. Kev If someone starts a thread, or bumps the current thread, asking for feedback, I'll give mine there. Then maybe that will encourage others to give feedback on standards@. Or maybe it won't, but it's a chance.
  649. genofire has joined
  650. Dave 10) Next meeting
  651. genofire has joined
  652. Dave Same time next week?
  653. Ge0rG +1W WFM
  654. genofire has joined
  655. Kev I can't do next week, but enjoy yourselves without me.
  656. SamWhited WFM
  657. Dave Kev has given apologies already, anyone else?
  658. genofire has joined
  659. genofire has joined
  660. genofire has joined
  661. genofire has joined
  662. genofire has joined
  663. genofire has joined
  664. Dave I'll take that as a no.
  665. genofire has joined
  666. Dave So I think we're done.
  667. Dave 11) Ite, Meeting Est.
  668. genofire has joined
  669. Dave Now I can go write the minutes.
  670. genofire has joined
  671. genofire has joined
  672. Kev Thanks all.
  673. genofire has joined
  674. genofire has joined
  675. genofire has joined
  676. genofire has joined
  677. genofire has joined
  678. genofire has joined
  679. genofire has joined
  680. genofire has joined
  681. genofire has joined
  682. genofire has joined
  683. genofire has joined
  684. genofire has joined
  685. genofire has joined
  686. genofire has joined
  687. genofire has joined
  688. genofire has joined
  689. Ge0rG has left
  690. genofire has joined
  691. genofire has joined
  692. genofire has joined
  693. genofire has joined
  694. genofire has joined
  695. genofire has joined
  696. genofire has joined
  697. genofire has joined
  698. genofire has joined
  699. genofire has joined
  700. genofire has joined
  701. genofire has joined
  702. genofire has joined
  703. genofire has joined
  704. genofire has joined
  705. ralphm has joined
  706. genofire has joined
  707. genofire has joined
  708. genofire has joined
  709. genofire has joined
  710. genofire has joined
  711. genofire has joined
  712. genofire has joined
  713. genofire has joined
  714. genofire has joined
  715. genofire has joined
  716. genofire has joined
  717. genofire has joined
  718. genofire has joined
  719. genofire has joined
  720. genofire has joined
  721. genofire has joined
  722. genofire has joined
  723. genofire has joined
  724. genofire has joined
  725. genofire has joined
  726. genofire has joined
  727. genofire has joined
  728. genofire has joined
  729. genofire has joined
  730. genofire has joined
  731. genofire has joined
  732. genofire has joined
  733. genofire has joined
  734. genofire has joined
  735. genofire has joined
  736. genofire has joined
  737. genofire has joined
  738. genofire has joined
  739. genofire has joined
  740. genofire has joined
  741. genofire has joined
  742. genofire has joined
  743. genofire has joined
  744. genofire has joined
  745. genofire has joined
  746. SamWhited So, RE Compliance Suites: I think it is important to work to a deadline on these. The beginning of the year may be an arbitrary deadline, but if we're going to consistently issue guidelines we can't keep doing a repeat of the 2010 or 2012 ones where they end up being in experimental for 5 years (or even half of a year). This is not a normal XEP where we can never make changes again after final and once the community adopts it it's hard to change, we have another shot every year. I hope that clarifies my position a bit.
  747. SamWhited If a council member thinks that it would be harmful to issue these as guidelines, they can of course -1 but I don't think any of the problems with it are that serious.
  748. Dave has left
  749. Dave has left
  750. daniel has left
  751. Dave has left
  752. Kev I think missing things out, or recommending the 'wrong' thing (e.g. '84 instead of '153, not doing '49/'54) can be actively harmful for interop, as we expect new implementations to use these specs as a 'what do I need to implement at the moment', which is why I care. You've noted before that it's confusing when there are multiple options on the table and people don't know which to choose. If we point people in the wrong direction for the current reality with the compliance suites, that's adding to the confusion.
  753. Kev It's not the same as having some nice feature that we could include, but don't, for things like that, in my view.
  754. jonasw I think the argument was that the compliance suites should posit how things *should* be, not how they currently are?
  755. Ge0rG Isn't it somewhere in between? What is needed for interop, and what is needed for a nice future?
  756. Kev How far ahead? The 153/84 thing isn't clear at all. '49 has been the status quo for a decade and a half, and shows no signs of changing, etc.
  757. SamWhited Then that feedback should have been sent when it was in LC
  758. Kev If we have compliance suites where implementing the suggestions means that you can't interoperate with the same features as everyone else does them, that seems deeply unhelpful unless we're very clear that it's aspirational.
  759. Ge0rG has left
  760. Kev SamWhited: There's two things with that. 1) There has been a new LC, triggered by the change of Council, since. 2) Council's review on advancement is not the same as LC feedback from the public.
  761. SamWhited 1 is process for processes sake and I don't think ever should have happened
  762. SamWhited 2 I disagree, council should have gotten their feedback in before it came to them for a vote so that it could have been addressed
  763. Kev I wasn't Council for the previous LC, and it hasn't been voted yet. Which is one of the reasons for (1).
  764. SamWhited If there is disagreement and it's not addressed they are obviously free to -1, but we should still get feedback to the author in a timely manner instead of giving it when we -1
  765. SamWhited I don't see why your feedback would change because you are or are not council
  766. Kev Did you do the same level of review of all XEPs going through the process before you were on Council, honestly?
  767. Kev The level of review expected by Council is not the same as that expected by every other person in the community.
  768. SamWhited I suppose that's fair; if I reviewed them at all I gave the same amount, but I didn't review all of them before I was council.
  769. Kev The level of review expected by Council is not the same as that expected from every other person in the community.
  770. Kev The reason I took a break from Council, as it happens, was purely because I couldn't afford to spend the many hours every week it often takes me to be on Council.
  771. SamWhited Either way, this is about deadlines and I think we should have made the deadline and should still get these out as quickly as possible even if they're not perfect. I don't see any major problems with them as they are now (for compatibility or otherwise) so I would like to have it voted on. If it's -1ed because someone disagrees then so be it.
  772. jonasw (FWIW, this was the final argument which convinced me to issue the LC, I didn’t do that for process’ sake)
  773. Ge0rG So how can we move on from here?
  774. Kev If this had made it through previous Council, this wouldn't have come up, but as things stand, the XEP is in front of me and as Council I do have to make the vote I think is appropriate - and I do think some of the recommendations in there will add to confusion and therefore be potentially harmful.
  775. Kev I have offered to propose the changes I think are needed myself, to try to unstall this, but I can't force that.
  776. SamWhited More harmful than continuing to not have compliance suites even though we could immediately fix them in the experimental suites for next year?
  777. Kev (I really don't want to, because I'm time-poor, but I will).
  778. Kev We could immediately fix them in the suites for this year, and have them advanced, too.
  779. Kev The time to write the changes for the current text is presumably shorter than to write a new protoXEP, and we've not voted on either yet.
  780. SamWhited But that will take multiple more weeks and I think it's much more important to have compliance suites issued in a timely manner.
  781. Kev Does it need to?
  782. Kev It would be uncomfortable for me to fit submitting a patch in before next meeting, but I will if that's the only way to unstick this.
  783. jonasw FWIW, there’s no need for a new LC if changes are incorporated
  784. Kev Vote happens next Wednesday. Everyone other than me votes in meeting. I vote onlist at the start of the following week. 12 days and it's done.
  785. Kev jonasw: I know.
  786. jonasw if I’m reading XEP-0001 correctly
  787. jonasw I’m not sure that SamWhited knows.
  788. SamWhited I am aware
  789. jonasw so I don’t see how this will take weeks.
  790. jonasw update today, vote next week, 1w exactly, done.
  791. SamWhited I am just sick to death of us having to have everything be perfect and not being able to meet a simple deadline.
  792. SamWhited As soon as there are new changes there will be someone else mad about it and we'll bike shed for another month. I hope to be proven wrong on that, of course.
  793. Kev I think the only deadline is actually the Author having addressed feedback before Council votes on it ;)
  794. jonasw SamWhited, no, they won’t be asked
  795. SamWhited And that was done, then the council didn't vote for weeks and made up an excuse to put it back into LC again.
  796. jonasw well, okay, they will be asked implicitly, but I doubt that there will be much going on w.r.t. to that.
  797. Kev I think you're wrongly fixating on LC here.
  798. Kev The only thing the LC has meant is that my feedback went to list as LC feedback, rather than as justification for -1.
  799. moparisthebest as an aside I think SamWhited is right, for instance the new https://dino.im/ website advertises "compliant with the official XMPP Compliance Suites 2016." and to someone not deeply involved in XSF that looks like it's 2 years out-dated
  800. Ge0rG With the LC over, one way or another, Council are the only ones who are allowed (and required) to provide feedback now.
  801. Kev In both cases the Author's expected to address it to the satisfaction of Council.
  802. Kev Ge0rG: Well, that's not true. Anyone is allowed to provide feedback at any time.
  803. Ge0rG Kev: damn.
  804. Kev LC is a request for a specific type of feedback, at a specific time. But standards@ is not muted the rest of the time.
  805. jonasw but council does not need to issue a new LC
  806. jonasw council is free to advance a XEP in its current state, no matter which pending feedback there is
  807. ralphm has joined
  808. SamWhited It was addressed to the satisfaction of council as far as I understood it, then the goalposts shifted and here we are over a week into 2018 and we still only have 2016 compliance suites.
  809. Kev If it was addressed to the satisfaction of old Council, surely it would have been advanced by now?
  810. Kev But regardless, current state is, I think:
  811. SamWhited One would think. These are also the same compliance suites that should have been 2017 ones but we kept bikeshedding details until eventually I just renamed them 2018.
  812. Kev Sam wants a compliance suite 2018 to be advanced.
  813. Ge0rG has left
  814. Kev Kev wants changes made to compliance suites 2018. Kev wants compliance suites 2018 advanced.
  815. Kev OK. So old Council failed. That can be a thing.
  816. Kev New Council are here, and there is a clear path to how to get this advanced imminently.
  817. Kev I don't currently understanding why you don't want to take it.
  818. Kev I also don't English, obviously.
  819. Kev If it's that you think the changes I'm proposing are actively wrong, I don't think that was reflected in your replies to date.
  820. SamWhited We should have voted weeks ago, we should have voted this week, etc. every time there is some excuse why we should vote later. More changes will just lead to more delays.
  821. SamWhited But I do think the feedback was good, FWIW, just not worth spending more time on until next years.
  822. Kev I don't think it was on Dave's agenda for voting this week.
  823. jonasw SamWhited, do you really think that people are actively making up excuses to sabotage the compliance suites to be published?
  824. SamWhited There has been a card on trello for months asking for a vote.
  825. jonasw SamWhited, do you really think that people are actively making up excuses to sabotage the compliance suites from being published?
  826. SamWhited jonasw: not in a malicious way, but yes
  827. Kev I get, I totally get, the frustration in this dragging on. But I'm offering an out here by doing the work needed to get this through.
  828. jonasw what is a non-malicious way of doing that?
  829. Kev And entirely not because I love doing XEP work.
  830. Kev So, separating 'how we got here' from 'where we go next', I'm not currently clear why you would rather it go to vote next week in a form it'll be rejected, rather than go to vote next week in a form I have no reason to anticipate won't be accepted.
  831. jonasw Kev, if you can summarize in two sentences what changes you want, I’ll make a PR for you.
  832. Kev jonasw: Thanks. I think at the point I've trawled my previous comments and got it down to two sentences, I may as well submit the PR, but I very much appreciate the sentiment.
  833. jonasw k
  834. SamWhited (just got pulled into an actual work meeting, sorry, maybe be unresponsive for an hour or so)
  835. Dave has left
  836. Dave has left
  837. Dave has left
  838. Ge0rG has left
  839. daniel has left
  840. SamWhited has left
  841. daniel has left
  842. Ge0rG has left
  843. jere has joined
  844. Kev https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/554 seems to be stuck in limbo, after we agreed on needing it in Council last year. I think that needs a Council vote too.
  845. Kev adds to agenda.
  846. ralphm has joined
  847. Ge0rG Kev: thanks
  848. Dave has left
  849. Ge0rG has left
  850. daniel has left
  851. Ge0rG has left
  852. Tobias has joined
  853. Tobias has joined
  854. Dave has left
  855. Ge0rG has left
  856. Dave has left
  857. Dave has left
  858. ralphm has joined
  859. Ge0rG has left
  860. Kev I have submitted a PR that addresses my feedback, and which I will happily +1 if merged.
  861. Kev https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/569
  862. Kev From the PR message:
  863. Kev This addresses, I believe, all the issues I raised. Where I was wrong (84), or it was contentious (220), I've dropped the point. Where Sam felt it was worth watering down (needing 153, but only read-only), I've done so.
  864. Kev If other Council folks would be kind enough to review this and check if I've screwed anything up, or this would alter their +1 of the spec, please let me know early. Ideally before Sam reviews it, to make this painless for him.
  865. Kev Assuming this gets merged in time, I suggest a vote on advancement next week.
  866. Kev daniel, Ge0rG, Dave: ^
  867. Kev I will be mostly out of action between morning Friday and next meeting, so if people have things I need to address, please let me know by then.
  868. Kev has left
  869. Ge0rG Damn. Reading those diffs is really a painful excercise in following up indirections.
  870. Ge0rG We should add aliases &yes; and &no; for the #1000x codes
  871. Zash The what
  872. Ge0rG has left
  873. Dave has left
  874. Dave has left
  875. Ge0rG So ✓ is "yes" and ✕ is "no", and you need to know the order of the columns from elsewhere in the document
  876. Zash has left
  877. Ge0rG Kev: so you've added 223 to the "IM / Advanced Server" profile, but not 222.
  878. Zash How was it you fetched PRs from git?
  879. SamWhited Ge0rG: if you know XML-y things I would love suggestions on how to fix that… I constantly put things in the wrong place because I couldn't remember what the number of each one was.
  880. Ge0rG Zash: `git fetch <remote> pull/25/head:<localname>`
  881. SamWhited Although, it's always UTF-8 encoded no? Maybe I just don't need to escape them… not sure why I didn't think of that before, I should try that.
  882. Ge0rG SamWhited: might be as easy as this: `<!ENTITY yes "&#10003;">`
  883. SamWhited oh, that's a good idea too…
  884. SamWhited Thanks, I'll update that in next years.
  885. Ge0rG SamWhited: great!
  886. Ge0rG SamWhited: I hope you keep track of the pending changes for 2019.
  887. Kev Kev: so you've added 223 to the "IM / Advanced Server" profile, but not 222. Yes, because 223 is needed for 48, but this might not be clear. It was already required, I just called it out.
  888. Ge0rG Kev: 48 RECOMMENDs 223, but it does not REQUIRE it.
  889. Ge0rG I still think it is good to call out support for 223, but then we should also add 222.
  890. Ge0rG Anyway, I'm okay with any subset, including the empty one, of {222, 223} be part of CS2018.
  891. Kev Ge0rG: I'm trying to keep the diff as small as possible while addressing my comments. If you really want 222 if 223 is added, I'd be inclined to remove 223, but I think what I've got there is helpful.
  892. Kev Ok, thanks. In that case, I'd go with what's there.
  893. Ge0rG has left
  894. Kev I was pondering whether to have 223 as a client or not. I'm happy to make that change if people want.
  895. Ge0rG Kev: my feeling tells me to replace the "N/A", but then again I haven't implemented PEP yet anyway.
  896. Dave has left
  897. Dave has left
  898. ralphm has joined
  899. Ge0rG has left
  900. Dave has left
  901. Dave has left
  902. ralphm has left
  903. Ge0rG has left
  904. ralphm has joined
  905. pep. ooi, why are the compliance suites dated by year, and not versioned? Is there a rationale somewhere?
  906. pep. I think that forces imaginary deadlines for no reason
  907. daniel pep.: so people see that this is recent and is actively being worked on
  908. daniel Come the year 2022 you have no idea whether version 3 of the compliance suite is still current or something that hasn't been worked on in years
  909. pep. I see your point, but I don't know if end-users need to know or care. I don't think they should even have to know about XMPP in the first place
  910. pep. Developers will know what version X of XEP-Y means
  911. daniel I wasn't talking about end users
  912. daniel And no developers don't know
  913. Zash Weren't compliance suites supposed to be for marketing or certification?
  914. pep. daniel, that is sad :/
  915. daniel Zash: they can if you want them to
  916. daniel I have a course you can let your employer pay for
  917. pep. But yes that makes sense for marketing etc.
  918. daniel That makes you a certified xmpp developer
  919. pep. You give them a medal? :P
  920. daniel Certificate
  921. pep. Same
  922. daniel People love certificates. HR loves certificates
  923. daniel Everyone has a masters degree these days. But a certificate will set you apart
  924. pep. I don't, and most at work here don't
  925. pep. Still I think we're doing ok
  926. pep. But yes sadly I get that's how it is
  927. moparisthebest I'm positive it's not universal at all, but I've worked with 2 devs that had masters degrees and both were the worst devs I've ever worked with 😛
  928. moparisthebest compared to the rest of the devs I work with with only bachelors degrees or no degrees
  929. Ge0rG has left
  930. Syndace has left
  931. Syndace has joined
  932. daniel But in all seriousness: most normale developers (normal as in outside the xsf) believe xmpp an unnavigateable jungle of XEPs. Telling them here are the 8 xeps you should implement if you want your product to be compatible is really useful. And has nothing to do with just marketing
  933. pep. daniel, don't get me wrong, I know compliance suites are useful
  934. daniel You can't assume that the average developer will know 400 xeps or do the research into what xeps are implemented by other clients
  935. pep. daniel, don't get me wrong, I also think compliance suites are useful
  936. pep. I would hope developers would aim for some interoperability with other clients and servers
  937. pep. If their product is out in the open
  938. moparisthebest but also used for marketing I think is good, but can also go wrong, dino.im mentions it's compliant with 2016 suites, which to everyone not in XSF makes it look 2 years behind
  939. pep. They could say "the latest compliance suite"
  940. pep. That already looks better
  941. moparisthebest but then where would it link? and it might not always be true 🙂
  942. pep. Yes people have to keep up-to-date, it's a fact
  943. pep. They can change the text if it's not true anymore, or change the link to point to the newer versoin
  944. pep. They can change the text if it's not true anymore, or change the link to point to the newer version
  945. Dave has left
  946. pep. Or they can keep "2016" if they don't care about people thinking what you said above
  947. ralphm has joined
  948. Ge0rG has left
  949. ralphm has joined
  950. Ge0rG has left
  951. daniel has left
  952. daniel has joined
  953. SamWhited has joined
  954. Zash has left
  955. Ge0rG has left
  956. Kev Scrolling backwards a bit, I don't have a Masters. That makes me great, right?
  957. daniel has left
  958. Tobias No wizard hat?
  959. ralphm has joined
  960. Dave has left
  961. Dave has left
  962. Zash has joined
  963. ralphm has left
  964. Ge0rG has left
  965. ralphm has joined
  966. Kev has left
  967. daniel has left
  968. Tobias has left
  969. Tobias has joined
  970. Ge0rG has left
  971. daniel has left
  972. daniel has left
  973. Dave has left
  974. Dave has left
  975. SamWhited has left
  976. Dave has left
  977. Dave has left
  978. ralphm has joined
  979. Kev I had a floppy hat, which is better.
  980. Ge0rG has left
  981. pep. has joined
  982. Ge0rG has left
  983. Dave has left
  984. Dave has left
  985. ralphm has joined
  986. SamWhited has joined
  987. Ge0rG has left
  988. jere has joined
  989. ralphm has left
  990. moparisthebest has joined
  991. Ge0rG has left
  992. ralphm has joined
  993. Dave has left
  994. vanitasvitae has left
  995. SouL has joined
  996. SouL has joined
  997. Ge0rG has left
  998. Zash has left
  999. vanitasvitae has joined
  1000. Zash has joined
  1001. Ge0rG has left
  1002. genofire has joined
  1003. genofire has joined
  1004. Dave has left
  1005. Dave has left
  1006. Dave has left
  1007. Ge0rG has left
  1008. Ge0rG has left
  1009. ralphm has left
  1010. ralphm has joined
  1011. Dave has left
  1012. Dave has left
  1013. Ge0rG has left
  1014. Ge0rG has left