XMPP Council - 2019-03-27

Hopefully the last week of silliness, but I'm probably going to be unavailable at Council time again.

I'm there today, and I'm very sorry for missing the last ones.

Afternoon all - I'm having a catastrophic day, so I'd be very grateful if we could skip this week.

Looks like we are missing two already.

I think we should get the vote on '412 started to stop people from flaming to the list

I'd absolutely love to have a formal vote on 0412

even if it's the only agenda item and everybody is on-list

I'm willing to chair through such a mini-agenda.

I’d be very ok with that

Do you have a Link Mauve?

he was around in another MUC a minute ago

I am here yes.

There is also ATT in the inbox.

Link Mauve, Opinion?

so we have 3/5 and we could get the vote on '412 and that protoxep started

with my editor hat on, I’d like to get the protoxep started, too, because it was lingering in the inbox for quite a while

Sounds sensible.

If you guys want to vote on those two, I can go along with that.

dwd: would you like somebody else (me?) to chair that?

Ge0rG, I'll take you up on that, it means I can pay less attention, and I confess my mind is on other things today.

1) Alright. Welcome everybody, roll call!

Kev sent apologies. Link Mauve?

Yup.

Awesome.

3.5/5, let’s roll

2) Agenda Bashing. I've got XEP-0412 for Draft and ATT from inbox

Anything else?

there is a needs council PR open

Thanks go to Tedd Sterr, the shoe fixing elf.

https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/764

I'm on a data capped connection, so I'll let that load in the background for now.

> XEP-0308: Clarify correcting a message multiple times

Ugh, that’ll break existing clients which correct based on the previous id.

3a) Item for Vote: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0412.html for Draft

Link Mauve, rightfully so!!!

I’m +1 on 3a

Ge0rG, +1 for me, your changes are good and we really should move on with that one.

+1 obviously

Alright, let's assume dwd being distracted and on-list and move on.

3b) Proposal of https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/automatic-trust-transfer.html

On list.

Mea culpa. I am on-list, but I did wonder if we should consider a last call once more given the change of author?

on list

(that of 412)

I'm on-list for ATT as well.

dwd: what would be your rationale for that? I can see an LC regarding my content changes, but I'd rather revert those and vote on Draft now, with a later changes-related Council vote then.

On list for ATT.

3c) https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/764 "XEP-0308: Clarify correcting a message multiple times"

Ge0rG, Mostly in the hope we'd hear at least some useful comments from the standards list, I admit.

I’m +1 on 3c

on-list for 3c.

it is, in my opinion, the obvious reading of the XEP. I know that others have other obvious readings, but should definitely pick one official obvious reading

-1. The XEP is in dire need of clarification, but the PR does a change into the wrong direction. It's more logical to correct the _last_ message and not the _first_ one, e.g. when fetching partial MUC history.

I’m ±0 on 3c, it will break clients, but the other way will probably break the other set of clients anyway although it seems more logical to me.

Ge0rG, right.

I need some damn good rationale (better than in the XEP change block) to get me convinced.

4) Outstanding Votes

Proposed XMPP Extension: E2E Authentication in XMPP: Certificate Issuance and Revocation - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/eax-cir.html

is expiring today. Not sure if there are still open votes on that

Proposed XMPP Extension: DNS Queries over XMPP (DoX) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dox.html as well

I’m still on list :/

Link Mauve, do you have an opinion on eax-cir?

4a I’m still on list too. :x

iirc DoX is only missing a vote from Kev and passes unless he -1's it

+1 to eax-cir

did jonas’ change to -0 on DoX?

Ge0rG, yes

afk

looks like eax-cir is going to pass with a slight minority then as well.

5) Next Meeting

+1W.

+1W sounds like it works for Kev as well

+1W WFM

Well. Let's just try it and see what happens.

6) AOB

Yes, I have an AOB for the editors, there are a few linging PRs still marked as Needs Council while our votes are expired, such as https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/747

Please do the needful. :)

Looks like the active subset of our editors just vanished. Let's hope they read the Minutes.

It also never hurts to mention that there is always one more place for volunteer editors.

mathieui, IIRC you were interested.

6B) AOAOB?

looks like we are done here.

7) Incomprehensible Latin Words

"Ite, Meeting Est". A paraphrase of the latin Catholic order of service, which is a phrase in such arcane Latin that nobody actually knows its literal meaning.

Also, thanks Ge0rG.

Thanks everyone.

so... who do I have to bribe to publish DoX on monday morning...

moparisthebest: we are looking for volunteer editors!

You could bribe yourself, how cool is that

moparisthebest: apply today, get approved tomorrow in Board.

hmmmmmm interesting

We made a call for editors not long ago

and hope that iteam will give you the required permissions until then.

"Ge0rG> -1. The XEP is in dire need of clarification, but the PR does a change into the wrong direction. It's more logical to correct the _last_ message and not the _first_ one, e.g. when fetching partial MUC history.", I also think it should be the other way, but tbh I don't mind as long as it's clear. What guarantees do we have that the other way it not going to be vetoed either? :(

FWIW, I won’t veto it, that’d be silly, I don’t even maintain an implementation.

(yet)

I wouldn’t veto it either, but it indeed would be much better to get a good rationale for the change, either way it goes.

pep., I also think that council is better than getting in a change-veto-loop

As it was mentioned here, I'd like to see more documentation for what I can do without any rights for the editors. I am soon going to have a bit more time and I hope I can help with that. If it's "you need powers" I'm also happy to be knighted if necessary, assuming I know the things to do

"without any rights" not much

with github powers you can already do a lot

which I also outlined in my mail to members@

jonas’, ok so I need to be knighted in any case if I want in right

I think so