Wednesday, December 12, 2018
council@muc.xmpp.org
December
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

[00:06:01] *** dos has left the room
[00:50:28] *** Zash shows as "away"
[00:55:58] *** Zash shows as "online"
[00:55:59] *** Zash shows as "online"
[02:03:04] *** Zash has left the room
[02:17:37] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[02:17:38] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[02:56:41] *** dos shows as "online"
[05:24:49] *** moparisthebest has left the room
[05:25:23] *** moparisthebest has joined the room
[05:29:17] *** moparisthebest has left the room
[05:29:42] *** moparisthebest has joined the room
[05:38:12] *** 4 has joined the room
[05:39:16] <4> yellow vest revolutionary council : 🏦 🗼
[05:39:31] <4> join the revolution : giletsjaunes@muc.jeproteste.info 😡 🏃‍♀️ 👩‍👩‍👧‍👦 ✊ 🧡
[05:44:27] <moparisthebest> Aw man did they raise xsf membership tax
[05:46:20] *** labdsf has left the room
[05:47:38] *** labdsf has joined the room
[06:25:13] *** labdsf has left the room
[06:27:35] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[06:29:46] *** ralphm has left the room
[06:29:50] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[06:48:47] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[07:00:44] <jonas’> theheck?
[07:12:23] *** SouL has left the room
[07:12:28] *** SouL shows as "online"
[07:17:13] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[07:17:35] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[07:18:24] *** ralphm has left the room
[07:41:23] *** labdsf has joined the room
[07:48:10] *** Kev shows as "online"
[07:50:48] <guus.der.kinderen> > Aw man did they raise xsf membership tax
🤣
[07:51:21] <guus.der.kinderen> Also, that avatar had a green shirt.
[08:16:34] *** Zash shows as "online"
[08:17:15] *** Tobias has joined the room
[08:32:42] *** moparisthebest has left the room
[08:33:11] *** moparisthebest has joined the room
[08:33:27] *** Zash shows as "online"
[08:37:25] *** Zash shows as "online"
[08:41:29] *** Zash has left the room
[08:49:07] *** Zash has left the room
[08:53:10] *** Zash shows as "online"
[08:55:23] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[09:03:12] *** Zash shows as "online"
[09:10:01] *** Zash has left the room
[09:20:48] *** ralphm has left the room
[09:23:55] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[09:23:56] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[09:28:45] *** Zash shows as "online"
[09:28:47] *** Zash shows as "online"
[09:29:03] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[09:29:24] *** Kev shows as "online"
[09:29:26] *** Zash shows as "dnd"
[09:32:22] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[09:32:30] *** akash has joined the room
[09:35:09] *** akash has left the room
[09:35:48] *** Tobias has joined the room
[09:38:49] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[09:38:58] *** Kev shows as "away"
[09:39:11] *** Kev shows as "online"
[09:42:35] *** akash has joined the room
[09:46:20] *** akash has left the room
[09:47:00] *** akash has joined the room
[09:47:55] *** Tobias has left the room
[09:48:39] *** Kev shows as "away"
[09:50:25] *** Tobias has joined the room
[09:53:01] *** daniel has left the room
[09:53:04] *** daniel has joined the room
[10:04:31] *** akash has left the room
[10:06:00] *** akash has joined the room
[10:17:33] *** akash has left the room
[10:19:27] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[10:19:28] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[10:19:52] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[10:23:09] *** moparisthebest has joined the room
[10:26:03] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[10:26:05] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[10:27:28] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[10:27:30] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[10:30:35] *** akash has joined the room
[10:44:29] *** akash has left the room
[10:44:38] *** akash has joined the room
[11:06:38] *** daniel has left the room
[11:06:43] *** daniel has joined the room
[11:07:45] *** Zash shows as "online"
[11:12:00] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[11:14:07] *** Zash has left the room
[11:14:53] *** Zash shows as "online"
[11:18:01] *** Zash has left the room
[11:19:28] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[11:19:30] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[11:19:41] *** Zash shows as "online"
[11:20:50] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[11:20:52] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[11:20:57] *** akash has left the room
[11:21:06] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[11:21:08] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[11:27:47] *** akash has joined the room
[11:27:51] *** Zash has left the room
[11:30:12] *** Zash has left the room
[11:48:12] *** Kev shows as "away"
[11:50:38] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[11:55:38] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[12:04:30] *** akash has left the room
[12:07:28] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[12:09:44] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[12:15:02] *** akash has joined the room
[12:16:22] *** labdsf has left the room
[12:16:27] *** labdsf has joined the room
[12:34:07] *** Zash has left the room
[12:34:27] *** akash has left the room
[12:38:12] *** Zash shows as "online"
[12:38:18] *** vanitasvitae shows as "online"
[12:41:55] *** akash has joined the room
[12:58:35] *** Zash shows as "dnd"
[12:58:37] *** Zash shows as "dnd"
[13:01:50] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[13:09:53] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[13:11:39] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[13:16:18] *** 4 shows as "online"
[13:16:59] *** 4 shows as "online"
[13:20:14] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[13:21:29] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[13:21:33] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[13:22:57] *** Kev shows as "online"
[14:03:23] *** Zash has left the room
[14:19:12] *** lnj has joined the room
[14:33:09] *** 4 has left the room
[14:33:11] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[14:38:34] *** 4 has joined the room
[14:39:30] *** akash has left the room
[14:40:37] *** akash has joined the room
[14:40:53] *** vanitasvitae has left the room
[14:40:56] *** vanitasvitae has joined the room
[14:49:21] *** Zash has left the room
[14:51:55] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[14:51:56] *** akash has left the room
[15:01:40] *** Zash shows as "online"
[15:05:17] *** akash has joined the room
[15:16:33] *** Zash shows as "dnd"
[15:16:36] *** Zash shows as "dnd"
[15:17:48] *** Zash has left the room
[15:22:45] *** Holger shows as "online" and his status message is "I'm available"
[15:30:36] *** Zash has left the room
[15:45:09] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[15:45:13] *** ralphm has left the room
[15:51:12] *** Ge0rG has joined the room
[15:51:22] *** akash has left the room
[15:51:45] *** akash has joined the room
[15:51:55] <Ge0rG> Is it that time of the week again?
[15:52:10] <jonas’> it is!
[15:52:12] <jonas’> well, in 8 minutes
[15:54:07] <Link Mauve> And this time I’m here! Sorry again for last week.
[15:54:33] <Ge0rG> Link Mauve: you better have some beverages with you this time
[15:54:49] <Link Mauve> I have tea besides me, like always.
[15:55:05] *jonas’ imagines Link Mauve with a cup of tea while protesting
[15:55:11] <jonas’> that’s too british for you
[15:55:14] <jonas’> I think?
[15:55:49] <Zash> Spent too long on that island?
[15:55:54] <Link Mauve> I had rooibos in my thermos last Saturday. ^^
[15:56:03] *** lnj has left the room
[15:56:14] <Link Mauve> In addition to a bottle of water, pretty much mandatory.
[15:56:46] <jonas’> I bet that thermos is classified as weaponry.
[15:56:48] <jonas’> because hard and such
[15:57:26] <Link Mauve> Damn, if I can’t import British customs anymore… Down with the Queen^Wpresident!
[15:57:44] <Ge0rG> you May have some problems.
[15:57:49] <jonas’> oh my god.
[15:57:58] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[15:58:07] *** akash has left the room
[16:00:06] *** akash has joined the room
[16:00:24] <Kev> 'tis time.
[16:00:38] <jonas’> 'tis time.
[16:00:46] <Kev> And we seem at first glance to not have a chair.
[16:01:01] *Kev pokes Dave.
[16:01:09] <Ge0rG> Does the XSF have a furniture budget?
[16:01:37] *** dwd has joined the room
[16:01:38] *** dwd shows as "online"
[16:01:43] <dwd> Afternoon.
[16:01:53] <jonas’> woo
[16:01:57] <dwd> Sorry, just dashed back from an external meeting across the city.
[16:02:03] <Ge0rG> Kev: your magic worked!
[16:02:18] <dwd> So:
[16:02:26] <dwd> 1) Roll Call:
[16:02:29] *jonas’
[16:02:35] *Link Mauve /me
[16:02:45] *Link Mauve
[16:02:50] *Ge0rG
[16:03:01] <dwd> XEP-0245
[16:03:21] <Kev> I is still here, naturally.
[16:03:28] <dwd> Full House!
[16:03:36] <dwd> 2) Items for a vote:
[16:04:38] <jonas’> (not sure if dwd is waiting for suggestions or searching in his documents)
[16:04:45] <jonas’> (we did have a ProtoXEP submission at least)
[16:04:45] <dwd> a) Proposed XMPP Extension: Simple Buttons
Inbox
[16:04:56] <dwd> https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/buttons.html
[16:05:08] <dwd> (Searching and fighting with a MacBook. Awful things)
[16:05:54] <jonas’> soo... I’m not happy with the things quality editor wise
[16:05:59] <dwd> Tempting to veto this until the examples are funnier.
[16:06:08] <dwd> jonas’, How so?
[16:06:25] <jonas’> e.g. the "OPTIONAL." thing which is left over below the Glossary heading
[16:06:43] <jonas’> section 9 is questionable too
[16:06:48] <jonas’> and such
[16:07:00] <jonas’> but I’m not here with my editor’s hat
[16:07:03] <Ge0rG> Do we have other comparable XEPs in place?
[16:07:15] <jonas’> Ge0rG, in terms of functionality or in terms of editorial quality?
[16:07:27] <Kev> We have accepted very raw XEPs in the past, if that's the question.
[16:07:29] <Ge0rG> in terms of functionality.
[16:07:29] <dwd> We've had a number of early Experimental XEPs in similar condition over the years, I think.
[16:07:39] <Kev> Often mine. Although I'm not sure I've gone quite this far.
[16:07:40] <Link Mauve> Ge0rG, we do have 0050, it’s mentioned already.
[16:07:50] <jonas’> Ge0rG, not that I know. the closest is data forms and ad-hoc, but they don’t do quite the same thing.
[16:08:13] <Ge0rG> I wonder if embedding a data form into a message would make sense instead.
[16:08:16] <Kev> They do so dangerously close to the same thing that a new mechanism seems wrong to me.
[16:08:28] <Zash> There's precedent for dataforms in messages in eg 0045
[16:08:33] <jonas’> Kev, which?
[16:08:41] <Kev> (xep4 in messages)
[16:08:51] <jonas’> indeed, kind of
[16:08:52] <Zash> I did a draft of that but it was ugly and horrifying and let's not go that way
[16:09:10] <dwd> Do we have buttons in dataforms?
[16:09:12] <Ge0rG> I kind of fear data-forms indeed.
[16:09:17] <Kev> I appreciate forms don't quite do buttons yet, but extending them for that and i18n seems more appropriate at first glance than a new mechanism that we'll later need to extend for other form things.
[16:09:18] *** akash has left the room
[16:09:20] <jonas’> dwd, no, but they could be handled with a list-single
[16:09:20] <Zash> dwd: not really
[16:09:23] <Link Mauve> dwd, we have list-single, which is close enough.
[16:09:34] <Ge0rG> aren't actions akin to buttons?
[16:09:40] <Link Mauve> It already is represented by buttons in some clients when there are few choices.
[16:09:44] <Zash> Ge0rG: those are fixed at next/prev/cancel/complete
[16:09:46] <dwd> Well, maybe - but with ad-hoc we did actions, as Ge0rG implies, not in dataforms.
[16:09:47] <jonas’> Ge0rG, they’re a Ad-Hoc thing, not a Data Forms thing
[16:10:02] *** akash has joined the room
[16:10:16] <Zash> dataforms in message: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-79
[16:10:19] <jonas’> vanilla Ad-Hoc does not allow passing the context of the conversation in which this is happening
[16:10:23] <jonas’> which this ProtoXEP does
[16:10:28] <jonas’> and which any solution which wants to have this needs to
[16:10:42] <Ge0rG> jonas’: I don't see context in this protoXEP
[16:10:46] <jonas’> Ge0rG, @from
[16:10:54] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[16:11:01] <jonas’> you can distinguish whether a reply from a user comes via a MUC or not
[16:11:03] <dwd> Ge0rG, There's context of conversation, not of message.
[16:11:16] <jonas’> although that would probably work via MUC IQs, but maybe let’s not go there either
[16:11:25] <jonas’> having context of the message is also a possibility with the protoxep by making the values unique
[16:11:33] <Zash> Combine with <thread> or whatever?
[16:11:37] <jonas’> (e.g. append the @id of the message)
[16:11:39] <dwd> So two questions:
[16:11:50] <Link Mauve> If two people send a <button/> in two following messages with the same @value, you have no way of knowing which one was referenced.
[16:11:54] <dwd> i) Do we think that having buttons in chat messages is OK?
[16:12:00] <jonas’> Link Mauve, that’s true for a MUC.
[16:12:03] <dwd> ii) Is this method so broken we should abandon it?
[16:12:10] <jonas’> i) yes, I do think that.
[16:12:24] <Ge0rG> +1 to (i), not sure about (ii)
[16:12:28] <jonas’> I do think that we should have that in fact, because there are many good and reasonable use-cases for this. Memberbot being one of them.
[16:12:29] <Link Mauve> jonas’, for direct chats too, if your contact sends you the same set of buttons twice.
[16:12:30] <Kev> i) I think some use case involving something like this is valid (not quite answering the question)
[16:12:35] <jonas’> Link Mauve, that’s your contact’s fault.
[16:12:51] <Link Mauve> dwd, i) definitely.
[16:13:04] *** Holger shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto-away (idle)"
[16:13:07] <dwd> jonas’, memberbot gets around the lack by using xmpp URIs to click on, which is pretty ikky.
[16:13:12] <jonas’> dwd, I agree.
[16:13:12] <Kev> ii) It doesn't seem to be actively broken, but that's not the only reason to consider rejecting, I think.
[16:13:14] <Ge0rG> maybe a client should only render the buttons in the last incoming message?
[16:13:35] <dwd> Ge0rG, Or grey them out when clicked.
[16:13:36] <jonas’> do we wanrt to open the can of worms what the "last message" is again? :)
[16:13:53] <Zash> I'd like a generic <in-reply-to id=.../> plz
[16:13:59] <jonas’> Zash, SHIM?
[16:14:06] <Link Mauve> ii) I’ve needed way more than “just a set of buttons” a few times, for instance this very poll you’re making could do with a two questions text-single form.
[16:14:34] <Kev> I'm of the opinion that this is the Wrong Way, in the absense of further persuasion.
[16:14:39] <Link Mauve> So, not sure it’s that broken, but it looks very much not usable for more than a very narrow set of usecases.
[16:14:59] <Kev> I just can't quite decide whether I should veto or not.
[16:15:06] <dwd> OK, so can I have some votes please:
[16:15:06] <jonas’> regarding (ii):
- I think those types of features are only useful for bots.
- I think this proposal is something to play with.
- I also definitely want more extensive features than this.
[16:15:12] <Kev> On-list.
[16:15:29] <jonas’> I think I’m with Kev, but it’s tricky.
[16:15:32] <dwd> I think I'm +0 on this.
[16:15:41] <Ge0rG> On-list as well, for similar reasons
[16:15:53] <jonas’> formal question: can I say -1 now and decide to change it to +0 or +1 later on, until everyone has voted or the vote expires?
[16:16:07] <Kev> I'm concerned that people will jump on this, implement the simple stuff, and then immediately start extending with other form fields, and we'll rebuild xep4.
[16:16:17] <jonas’> Kev, very valid convern
[16:16:17] <dwd> jonas’, We have, historically, allowed changes to votes until the last vote comes in, yes.
[16:16:19] <jonas’> Kev, very valid concern.
[16:16:23] <Kev> jonas’: I see nothing wrong with 'on-list, -1 if I don't do so'.
[16:16:29] <jonas’> ok.
[16:16:30] <Link Mauve> On list.
[16:16:34] <dwd> jonas’, Also, what Kev says.
[16:16:37] <jonas’> on-list, -1 if I don’t do that.
[16:16:48] <Kev> (But if you do end up with -1, you're obliged to provide reasons)
[16:17:02] <dwd> jonas’, Though please do vote even if it's to confirm a veto, since otherwise you're delaying the end of the vote.
[16:17:11] <jonas’> ok
[16:17:20] <jonas’> also, good point Kev.
[16:17:29] <jonas’> so changing to pure on-list now, because I can’t give a clear reason for -1 on the spot
[16:17:39] <Kev> You don't have to on the spot, on standards@ is appropriate.
[16:17:53] <jonas’> Kev, if I say "-1 if I don’t go on-list", I kinda have to though :)
[16:18:18] <Ge0rG> would this protoxep be sufficient for the "interact with a bot" use case?
[16:18:24] <dwd> Out of curiosity, of those on-list, are any of you potentially going to vote +1, or is this a choice between -1 and ±0?
[16:18:30] <jonas’> Ge0rG, not for the use-cases I have in mind.
[16:18:33] <Kev> This is a choice between -1 and -0.
[16:18:43] <jonas’> dwd, there is a slim chance of +1
[16:18:51] <Ge0rG> there is a moderate chance of +1
[16:19:01] <dwd> I ask because unless we can find three +1's, there's very little point in continuing.
[16:19:04] <jonas’> my issue with data forms is still that they don’t have a i18n story, and while others seem to think that you can always discover the right language, I don’t think that’s true.
[16:19:23] <Ge0rG> I like the simplicity of the proposal, and it might be a good self-contained things not bothered by dataforms
[16:19:24] <jonas’> so on this ground alone, I thnik that this proposal has a material advantage over plain data forms.
[16:19:25] <dwd> jonas’, I'm afraid that i18n in more a theory than a practise anyway.
[16:19:47] <jonas’> dwd, I know of implementations which send i18n’d error messages, and implementations which can deal with that to some extent.
[16:19:49] <Kev> jonas’: I think we're faced with two options - one is to 'fix' xep4 in whatever way, the other is to invent an entirely new xep4. Given xep4's ubiquity, I'm far more inclined to fix that (until it's shown it can't be fixed).
[16:20:03] <jonas’> Kev, I agree.
[16:20:15] <jonas’> although I think that XEP-0004 in itself does too many things already.
[16:20:42] <jonas’> (I don’t like the mix of forms and reports under the same element, it makes implementations weird and validation more complex than necessary.)
[16:20:49] <dwd> Kev, The other alternative is a sort of mutation of XEP-0050 for chat.
[16:20:54] *** ralphm shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Not available as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[16:21:08] <Kev> dwd: Essentially extending xep4, I think, so I'd put that under the same heading.
[16:21:21] <Zash> 'submit' type form field?
[16:21:38] <Zash> Like <input type=submit> in html?
[16:21:47] <jonas’> just a list-single with a specific var would do, no?
[16:22:24] <dwd> Anyway, you're all on-list, so let's move on.
[16:22:48] <dwd> Although what to, I'm not so sure - do we have anything else to vote on?
[16:23:13] <Kev> https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2019.html ?
[16:23:15] <jonas’> did previous council close the votes on #716, #715? sorry, I don’t have that in my mental cache at the moment and they’re still open on github
[16:23:18] <jonas’> oh, yeah, and that
[16:23:21] <dwd> Yes, just getting to that.
[16:23:32] <jonas’> (for future reference:
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/716
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/715
)
[16:23:46] <dwd> b) Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP Compliance Suites 2019
[16:23:54] <dwd> https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2019.html
[16:24:06] *** akash has left the room
[16:24:26] <jonas’> +1, but I’d like a discussion on why the CS are on the Standards Track and not Informational. It doesn’t make sense to me, semantically, except that XEP-0001 specifically lists CS to be on Standards Track.
[16:24:38] <Link Mauve> +1, even though there are a few new XEPs missing from it which would be useful in 2019, but that can be fixed.
[16:24:39] <dwd> I'm +1 on this.
[16:24:55] <Ge0rG> +1 for moving to experimental
[16:24:58] <Kev> I only caught this just before Council, so I need to on-list.
[16:25:03] <Kev> Sorry.
[16:25:15] <Ge0rG> jonas’: what's the delta to CS'18?
[16:25:40] <dwd> jonas’, Adding a delta to the document would be handy, actually.
[16:26:01] <Ge0rG> (I think it would make sense to mention new / removed XEPs in the Revision History)
[16:26:09] <jonas’> Ge0rG, that would make sense if it was the same document
[16:26:18] <Kev> It would anyway, I think.
[16:26:30] <jonas’> one sec for the "diff"
[16:26:43] <Kev> Not here necessarily, in the XEP itself.
[16:26:49] <Ge0rG> jonas’: IMHO, it would make sense to keep the whole history of CS in the newest one.
[16:26:56] <Link Mauve> As per my email from last meeting, I’d like to make a lot more noise about compliance suites, calling it XMPP 2019 and doing a lot of marketing around this, pointing fingers to Pidgin and other abandonned clients.
[16:26:56] <jonas’> Ge0rG, that’s awful
[16:27:25] <jonas’> Link Mauve, maybe sync up with Tedd Sterr on this
[16:27:35] <Ge0rG> yaxim is abandoned by that definition 😢
[16:27:48] <jonas’> Ge0rG, ok, the diff is unreadable even for me, so I’d like to do that in a quiet minute
[16:27:53] <dwd> Link Mauve, It's something to be pushed up to the Board,m actually.
[16:27:58] <Link Mauve> Ge0rG, the goal is to stop with the complaint that XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad.
[16:28:02] <Link Mauve> dwd, indeed.
[16:28:03] <Ge0rG> jonas’: at the minimum I'd like to see what changed since the last CS in the revision history
[16:28:19] <jonas’> Ge0rG, can do, but not right now
[16:28:58] <Ge0rG> Link Mauve: I know, but as long as Pidgin is advertised by the XSF, this is moot (https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/715)
[16:29:06] <Zash> Is "XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad" solvable by redefining "XMPP"? I suspect we need to crowd-fund maintanence and development of it to fix that. :|
[16:29:07] <Ge0rG> Link Mauve: I know, but as long as Pidgin is advertised by the XSF, this is moot (https://xmpp.org/software/clients.html)
[16:29:17] <Zash> Is "XMPP is bad because Pidgin is bad" solvable by redefining "XMPP"? I suspect we need to crowd-fund maintanence and development of Pidgin to fix that. :|
[16:29:24] <jonas’> bump the stream header version
[16:29:30] <Link Mauve> Ge0rG, no, we can change things even if we don’t fix all of them at once.
[16:29:35] <Ge0rG> XMPP2 for president!
[16:29:52] <jonas’> Ge0rG, so you’re -1 until the revision history is fixed?
[16:29:55] <Zash> jonas’: YES! Kill the jabber:client & jabber:server namespaces and unify! :D
[16:30:00] <jonas’> oh no, you gave your +1 already :)
[16:30:03] <Ge0rG> jonas’: I'm +1
[16:30:05] <jonas’> Zash, sounds like a plan!
[16:30:12] <Link Mauve> And the announce effect is already something to aim for, for “compliance suites” or whichever new name we’d find.
[16:30:19] <Link Mauve> (I like Rust’s “editions”.)
[16:30:21] <jonas’> dwd, I think everyone gave a vote or on-list’d?
[16:30:21] <Ge0rG> Link Mauve: we can only change things if all of us are heading in the same direction.
[16:30:25] <Kev> I would very much like to see a logical diff from the previous suite, but that won't be influencing my vote (on-list).
[16:31:02] <dwd> Folks, what the Board chooses to do with the website and the compliance suites once we finish them is out of scope for this meeting.
[16:31:02] <jonas’> (FWIW, I’d also like input from the xmpp-based social network crowd; they could probably use their own section in the CS)
[16:31:16] <Ge0rG> regarding contents, I think that 0184 belongs to IM Core
[16:31:24] <Link Mauve> I’d like cs-2019 not to supersede cs-2018 until it is set active, but other than that +1.
[16:31:40] <dwd> Link Mauve, I think that's automatically the case.
[16:31:57] <jonas’> Ge0rG, can you put this on-list or somewhere less ephemeral than this room, please?
[16:32:02] <Link Mauve> dwd, it currently is set to supersede it, even though it’ll be experimental for a while.
[16:32:10] <Link Mauve> But that’s editor’s domain.
[16:32:17] <dwd> Link Mauve, Yes, but it's an intent until it's Active, I believe.
[16:32:22] <jonas’> it will never be Active
[16:32:27] <jonas’> because it’s Standards Track
[16:32:38] <jonas’> it can only become Draft or Final (on the positive side of things)
[16:32:50] <jonas’> it can only become Draft and Final (on the positive side of things)
[16:32:50] <dwd> ANything else?
[16:32:56] <dwd> (To vote on?)
[16:33:03] <jonas’> the PRs I mentioned above
[16:33:15] <dwd> jonas’, I'll check the status of those PRs later. I cannot recall their status either.
[16:33:21] <jonas’> ok
[16:33:22] <jonas’> fine with me
[16:33:25] <dwd> 3) AOB
[16:33:33] <jonas’> just a quick note that we have had a XEP-0001 modification
[16:33:34] <Ge0rG> IIRC we voted on both PRs.
[16:33:37] <Link Mauve> jonas’, the last council said they didn’t have any pending vote.
[16:33:42] <jonas’> we can now move Proposed back to Experimental
[16:33:57] <jonas’> and also that we have a bunch of stuff stuck in Last Call
[16:34:07] <jonas’> so that would be something to look on for the next meeting
[16:34:09] <Kev> I thought everything got voted on last Council.
[16:34:17] <dwd> KevI think so too.
[16:34:19] <jonas’> ok, then it’s probably my (editor’s) own oversight
[16:34:21] <Kev> At least, everything I knew needed to be.
[16:34:49] <jonas’> For reference, those are the open LCs:
XEP-0357 (Push Notifications), LC ends: 2018-11-03; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0357.html
XEP-0359 (Unique and Stable Stanza IDs), LC ends: 2018-11-03; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0359.html
XEP-0280 (Message Carbons), LC ends: 2018-02-22; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0280.html
XEP-0363 (HTTP File Upload), LC ends: 2018-06-18; https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0363.html
[16:34:57] <jonas’> since they’re open, I’ll re-start them due to council switch as editor soon-ish
[16:35:03] <jonas’> just so that you get an idea already.
[16:35:23] <Kev> At least 357 and 359 aren't open, we definitely finished those last Council.
[16:35:25] <jonas’> (after double-checking that they havent been voted on already)
[16:35:47] <dwd> jonas’, I believe that XEP-0363 is awaiting edits due to feedback, but I might be wrong.
[16:35:58] <Ge0rG> I'm pretty sure we also -1ed Carbons because of XMPP-NG
[16:36:03] <jonas’> hm
[16:36:20] <jonas’> ok, I’ll shut up now and do my due diligence as editor. sorry for the noise. :)
[16:37:08] <dwd> Any Other AOB?
[16:37:13] <jonas’> not from me
[16:37:30] <dwd> 4) Next Meeting
[16:37:38] <jonas’> +1w WFM
[16:37:42] <dwd> Same XMPP Time, Same XMPP Channel?
[16:38:12] <Link Mauve> WFM.
[16:38:20] <dwd> That's 2018-12-19 16:00 UTC.
[16:38:30] <Kev> I will try to be here. I'll be in another meeting at the same time.
[16:38:35] <Kev> So preemptive tentative apologies.
[16:38:40] <dwd> I'll be (finally!) back at home.
[16:38:46] <Link Mauve> Kev, would another time suit you better?
[16:38:57] <Kev> Not a lot.
[16:38:57] <Ge0rG> I'll be on a train most probably.
[16:39:09] <Kev> It's only next week and last week it's an issue.
[16:39:15] <Ge0rG> Unless, due to strike, I'll be on a car. Which will make typing much more challenging.
[16:39:17] <jonas’> I can do any day of the week except friday and weekend next week at that time, FWIW
[16:40:00] <dwd> Let's stick with the same time and hope Kev/Georg can make it. We hit Christmas after that anyway.
[16:40:20] <Link Mauve> Yup, at which point we can do the meeting at 35c3. :D
[16:40:26] <jonas’> (not for me)
[16:40:39] <dwd> 5) Ite, Meeting Est.
[16:40:42] <dwd> Thanks all.
[16:40:43] <Kev> Thanks all.
[16:40:45] <jonas’> thanks all
[16:40:50] <Ge0rG> Thanks!
[16:40:51] <Link Mauve> Thanks. :)
[16:42:21] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[16:43:11] <Ge0rG> Oh, I'd also like to advance XEP-0410.
[16:44:19] <Link Mauve> Ge0rG, shouldn’t you do that on standards@?
[16:46:12] <Ge0rG> probably yes
[16:46:32] <jonas’> you wanna have a Call For Experience issued?
[16:47:49] <Ge0rG> I think I do. We have working implementations in poezio and in yaxim, and the server optimization in ejabberd and prosody
[17:06:11] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[17:07:19] *** akash has joined the room
[17:11:09] *** Zash shows as "online"
[17:12:11] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[17:12:16] *** ralphm has left the room
[17:13:28] *** Kev shows as "away"
[17:15:59] *** lnj has joined the room
[17:16:30] *** Kev shows as "online"
[17:23:35] *** Zash shows as "online"
[17:24:20] *** akash has left the room
[17:39:15] *** dos has left the room
[17:40:44] *** akash has joined the room
[17:45:08] *** dwd shows as "away"
[17:45:56] *** dwd shows as "online"
[17:46:34] *** akash has left the room
[17:54:39] *** akash has joined the room
[17:57:00] *** dwd has left the room
[18:02:18] *** Zash shows as "online"
[18:11:57] *** Zash has left the room
[18:14:27] *** Zash shows as "online"
[18:19:20] *** Zash has left the room
[18:20:15] *** 4 has left the room
[18:23:13] *** Kev shows as "away"
[18:25:34] *** Kev shows as "online"
[18:42:27] *** akash has left the room
[18:44:49] *** akash has joined the room
[19:05:09] *** labdsf has left the room
[19:05:10] *** labdsf has joined the room
[19:16:15] *** labdsf has left the room
[19:20:23] *** lnj has left the room
[19:49:32] *** Kev shows as "online"
[19:49:32] *** Kev shows as "away"
[19:49:33] *** Kev shows as "online"
[19:49:33] *** Kev shows as "away"
[19:57:39] *** Kev shows as "away"
[19:58:31] *** Kev shows as "online"
[20:08:34] *** Kev shows as "away"
[20:11:54] *** Kev shows as "online"
[20:24:55] *** labdsf has joined the room
[20:29:55] *** Tobias has joined the room
[20:43:26] *** Kev shows as "away"
[20:51:43] *** Kev shows as "online"
[21:05:50] *** Kev shows as "away"
[21:07:28] *** labdsf has left the room
[21:09:05] *** lnj has joined the room
[21:09:16] *** Kev shows as "online"
[21:13:48] *** labdsf has joined the room
[21:32:32] *** akash has left the room
[21:32:36] *** akash has joined the room
[21:36:34] *** akash has left the room
[21:36:36] *** akash has joined the room
[21:37:51] *** akash has left the room
[21:37:56] *** akash has joined the room
[21:38:33] *** akash has left the room
[21:38:37] *** akash has joined the room
[21:38:57] *** lnj has left the room
[21:39:20] *** akash has left the room
[21:39:24] *** akash has joined the room
[21:40:18] *** akash has left the room
[21:40:21] *** akash has joined the room
[21:40:47] *** akash has left the room
[21:40:50] *** akash has joined the room
[21:42:22] *** akash has left the room
[21:42:31] *** akash has joined the room
[21:43:09] *** akash has left the room
[21:43:12] *** akash has joined the room
[21:43:55] *** akash has left the room
[21:43:58] *** akash has joined the room
[21:44:54] *** akash has left the room
[21:45:04] *** akash has joined the room
[21:45:37] *** Kev shows as "away"
[21:45:53] *** akash has left the room
[21:45:57] *** akash has joined the room
[21:46:21] *** Kev shows as "online"
[21:46:44] *** akash has left the room
[21:46:47] *** akash has joined the room
[21:47:26] *** akash has left the room
[21:47:29] *** akash has joined the room
[21:47:57] *** akash has left the room
[21:48:00] *** akash has joined the room
[21:48:27] *** lnj has joined the room
[21:49:09] *** akash has left the room
[21:49:11] *** akash has joined the room
[21:50:12] *** akash has left the room
[21:50:15] *** akash has joined the room
[21:51:10] *** akash has left the room
[21:51:12] *** akash has joined the room
[21:51:46] *** dos shows as "online"
[21:52:06] *** akash has left the room
[21:52:18] *** dos has left the room
[21:52:20] *** akash has joined the room
[21:52:37] *** dos shows as "online"
[21:53:08] *** akash has left the room
[21:53:11] *** akash has joined the room
[21:54:02] *** akash has left the room
[21:54:05] *** akash has joined the room
[21:54:42] *** akash has left the room
[21:54:45] *** akash has joined the room
[21:55:34] *** lnj has left the room
[21:55:37] *** akash has left the room
[21:56:18] *** akash has joined the room
[21:57:51] *** akash has left the room
[21:57:53] *** akash has joined the room
[21:58:54] *** akash has left the room
[21:58:57] *** akash has joined the room
[21:59:39] *** akash has left the room
[21:59:44] *** akash has joined the room
[22:00:31] *** akash has left the room
[22:01:06] *** akash has joined the room
[22:01:18] *** akash has left the room
[22:01:22] *** akash has joined the room
[22:01:38] *** Zash has left the room
[22:08:03] *** akash has left the room
[22:08:15] *** akash has joined the room
[22:10:35] *** akash has left the room
[22:10:52] *** akash has joined the room
[22:14:12] *** akash has left the room
[22:14:19] *** akash has joined the room
[22:16:45] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:18:37] *** Kev shows as "away"
[22:19:20] *** akash has left the room
[22:19:30] *** akash has joined the room
[22:22:12] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:22:16] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:22:40] *** akash has left the room
[22:22:46] *** akash has joined the room
[22:23:15] *** Zash has left the room
[22:24:47] *** akash has left the room
[22:24:52] *** akash has joined the room
[22:27:49] *** akash has left the room
[22:27:54] *** akash has joined the room
[22:28:46] *** akash has left the room
[22:30:12] *** akash has joined the room
[22:30:44] *** Link Mauve has left the room
[22:31:17] *** akash has left the room
[22:31:20] *** akash has joined the room
[22:41:59] *** akash has left the room
[22:42:01] *** akash has joined the room
[23:04:00] *** Link Mauve has joined the room
[23:05:43] *** akash has left the room
[23:05:57] *** akash has joined the room
[23:07:15] *** 4 has joined the room
[23:12:03] *** akash has left the room
[23:12:07] *** akash has joined the room
[23:30:54] *** akash has left the room
[23:31:01] *** akash has joined the room
[23:45:36] *** Tobias has left the room