XSF logo XSF Editor Team - 2014-03-18


  1. Steffen Larsen has joined
  2. Steffen Larsen has left
  3. Steffen Larsen has joined
  4. winfried has joined
  5. Steffen Larsen has left
  6. Steffen Larsen has joined
  7. Lloyd has joined
  8. Steffen Larsen has left
  9. Ash has joined
  10. m&m has joined
  11. Kev has joined
  12. Neustradamus has left
  13. winfried has left
  14. Simon has joined
  15. winfried has joined
  16. m&m T -10 minutes
  17. winfried Have to leave in T -5 min :-(
  18. Steffen Larsen has joined
  19. m&m boo! )-:
  20. winfried good meeting & CU!
  21. winfried has left
  22. Steffen Larsen meeting?
  23. Steffen Larsen wasn't it now?
  24. Lloyd yep
  25. Steffen Larsen ohhh ok
  26. Steffen Larsen :-)
  27. m&m in 2 minutes
  28. m&m 16:00 UTC
  29. m&m ding ding ding!
  30. m&m we're missing Winfried with apologies, everyone else here?
  31. Lloyd peter?
  32. Steffen Larsen ding dong
  33. Ash Hello all!
  34. m&m just pinged him
  35. Steffen Larsen Hi Ash
  36. m&m well, I think we have quorum
  37. Steffen Larsen jup
  38. m&m I should have pushed out an agenda earlier
  39. m&m 0) Roll Call
  40. m&m already have that determined
  41. m&m 1) Status on Automation Options
  42. m&m Lloyd or Ash?
  43. zeank@jwchat.org has joined
  44. stpeter has joined
  45. stpeter hi
  46. Ash I think Lloyd was looking at that
  47. Steffen Larsen Hi Stefan
  48. zeank@jwchat.org hey ho :)
  49. Steffen Larsen Hi StPeter
  50. stpeter forgot to log into this account
  51. m&m (-:
  52. m&m Lloyd: any updates yet on automation options
  53. m&m ?
  54. Lloyd With apologies, I haven't made much progress, I have scribbled notes but nothing worth sharing yet. Its our very busy time at Surevine and I've been snowed under with other projects too.
  55. m&m Lloyd: completely understand
  56. Steffen Larsen Lloyd: if I can give a hand.. just reach out with your ideas
  57. Ash It's coming up to the end of the financial year in the UK, so we're always busy around this time!
  58. m&m I might send along some of my personal musings for you all to ridicule and marginalize (-:
  59. Lloyd Basic plan is/has been to outline what we can automate, suitable methods of automation. I plan on sharing notes with Steffen Larsen and getting something together properly.
  60. Steffen Larsen super
  61. m&m awesome
  62. Lloyd Intend to share early and build upon it rather than get something concrete first.
  63. m&m is it worthwhile to pester you next week about it?
  64. Lloyd m&m: would be great to have as well.
  65. Steffen Larsen fail first is best. :-)
  66. Lloyd I'm good at failing first.
  67. m&m (-:
  68. Steffen Larsen he he
  69. Lloyd m&m please keep pestering, I can always ignore you :)
  70. m&m hehe
  71. m&m ok, since there's nothing else on automation ...
  72. m&m 2) outstanding work
  73. m&m I think I've gotten all of the requests for ProtoXEPs and Experimental updates out last week, plus BOSH
  74. m&m anyone see anything else come in?
  75. zeank@jwchat.org \o/ :)
  76. stpeter yes, good work m&m!
  77. m&m I'm trying! (-:
  78. Lloyd :D
  79. Steffen Larsen noo I dont think so. But somethines its hard to seperate stuff on the editor list. But great work m&m!
  80. stpeter BTW I have been adding XEP authors to the "accepts" list in mailman - makes it easier to sort through all the spam in the queue
  81. m&m /nod
  82. m&m thanks for that, stpeter
  83. Steffen Larsen super
  84. m&m and I'm relying on those with list admin privs to help sort the other wheat from chaff
  85. m&m I think that includes Winfried and Steffan?
  86. m&m did you guys get admin access to at least editor@ yet?
  87. m&m notes to ask Winfried separately
  88. zeank@jwchat.org nods
  89. Steffen Larsen need to create key!
  90. m&m er, Stefan
  91. Steffen Larsen any requirements for the ssh key?
  92. m&m one "f", not two
  93. m&m (-:
  94. stpeter I think it's only me, m&m, and zeank who have list admin privs
  95. m&m right
  96. zeank@jwchat.org maybe stupid question but why would it be so hard to put a spamfilter in between?
  97. m&m I think Winfried volunteered to help with moderating there, too
  98. stpeter zeank@jwchat.org: yes, we're thinking about that too :-)
  99. m&m and that's a task for the i-team to work on, with whatever approvals they need from the Board
  100. stpeter I suppose we could do that just for the editor@ address instead of for the entire mailman install? not sure
  101. m&m they are aware of the issues, though
  102. m&m stpeter: possibly, since this list is the one with the most impact
  103. stpeter all the other lists require subscription in order to post
  104. m&m right
  105. m&m this is the only one that wants looser posting privs
  106. m&m AFAIK
  107. stpeter yes
  108. m&m alright, since there's nothing else on actual editor work outstanding ...
  109. m&m 3) Next Meeting
  110. m&m I personally find a short weekly meeting worthwhile, so lets assume we have something next week
  111. Ash +1
  112. m&m same time, or do we want earlier?
  113. Steffen Larsen hhmm I need to get home from work
  114. m&m 16:00 UTC is now 10:00 my time
  115. Steffen Larsen so 16UTC is fine for me :-)
  116. m&m I know it switches in a couple of weeks for the rest of you
  117. stpeter although not for too much longer I suppose
  118. zeank@jwchat.org jup
  119. m&m well, let's plan on 16:00 UTC for next week, and discuss a possible change when Daylight Savings hits (most of) the rest of the world
  120. zeank@jwchat.org ok
  121. Ash Add that to next week's agenda
  122. stpeter WFM
  123. m&m will do
  124. Ash Will probably affect the council and board too
  125. Lloyd sounds good
  126. m&m 4) Any Other Business
  127. m&m I assumed everything else was stuff we talked about last week, so wasn't a surprise for the unannounced agenda (-:
  128. m&m I have an AOB
  129. stpeter go for it
  130. m&m When it comes to accepting patches
  131. m&m one request came from a non-author, and one came without an actual patch file
  132. m&m for the non-author, I asked the listed authors if it was ok to accept the patches (and it was)
  133. m&m I think that's a reasonable requirement, but it's not documented anywhere that I could see
  134. Ash There are some interesting potential issues with that. What if we can't contact any xep authors?
  135. stpeter side topic: if the person sent large patches, why not make that person an author?
  136. m&m so, my question on this one is — should we update -0143 to be clearer on this?
  137. m&m stpeter: I asked the original author that, and he was reluctant
  138. Steffen Larsen heh difficult question
  139. m&m it is
  140. stpeter m&m: I had the same experience before with that spec or a related one, and it strikes me as odd
  141. m&m I figured
  142. m&m on one hand, adding this person as an author would streamline our process and ease my ethical compass
  143. m&m and the owner of the work is the XSF, not the author
  144. m&m on the other, I don't want to scare serious contributors off by making (seemingly) arbitrary changes
  145. Kev FWIW, I don't think the Editor team is the right group to make decisions about the author list of XEPs.
  146. zeank@jwchat.org true
  147. m&m Kev: I agree, and in this case, I told them I would bring it to the Council
  148. stpeter Ash: we have had authors disappear in the past, and what we do is try to contact them - if that's unsuccessful and someone else wants to become a maintainer, we add the new person
  149. Lloyd agree with Kev, we're just update monkies :)
  150. stpeter after posting to the standards@ list and all
  151. m&m I just think we ought to have this better documented, possibly in a XEP
  152. stpeter but yes, some of this might need to be added to XEP-0001 or XEP-0143 or something
  153. stpeter +1 to m&m
  154. Kev Also FWIW, I think there's a difference betwe 'own' in the legal sense and 'own' in the maintenance sense.
  155. m&m Kev: right
  156. stpeter yes
  157. m&m I think it's within the purview of the editor to make a best effort for maintenance owners
  158. Steffen Larsen can you as an owner give your XEP to others for further maintainance ?
  159. Kev (I also think it'd be good to have a process for adding authors without the existing authors documented)
  160. m&m Steffen Larsen: yes, and that has happened in the past
  161. Steffen Larsen ok
  162. m&m ok, so I think I see consensus for formalizing a process
  163. Ash Would be good to get some of this down and in front of council
  164. m&m for now, let's try to think of our arguments, and put them into a XEP format
  165. Ash (or board in this case?)
  166. m&m My initial thinking is this is a Board matter, but can be readily persuaded in other directions
  167. Kev Fuzzy line for me, I'd go along with either.
  168. m&m I think it comes down to whether it's most appropriate for this to go into XEP-0001, go into XEP-0143, or go into something new
  169. m&m I can bring it up with the council and board tomorrow
  170. Kev 143 doesn't seem right, to me.
  171. m&m Kev: me neither
  172. Ash This feels like a 0001 thing to me
  173. m&m it feels like a change to 1
  174. m&m right
  175. stpeter yeah, me too (at the moment)
  176. m&m how about we approach the board and council for input before we go too much further
  177. Kev Either 1 or a How Editors work XEP.
  178. Kev Both/either seem appropriate.
  179. stpeter I could also see it go into an Editorial Team Procedures document
  180. m&m me, too
  181. m&m the non-patch instance was mostly annoying to me, and I think is best handled with an update to XEP-0143 and/or this new "How to Editor" XEP
  182. m&m I think XEP-0143 ought to be updated to 2119 mandate an actual patch file
  183. m&m so what is the action to be taken from all this discussion
  184. m&m wants to end already! (-:
  185. Ash Depends how we want to accept patches. A gitorious merge request would count (although I suppose that;s just a fancy patch)
  186. stpeter "send patches" is a fine policy to me!
  187. m&m I do want to be flexible, but we can't be expected to go hunting around
  188. stpeter yep
  189. m&m it took me almost an hour to suss out what the real changes were for the non-patchfile case
  190. m&m well, an hour including the disruptions
  191. Ash m&m can we get the main points from this and add them to the agenda next week?
  192. Steffen Larsen m&m auch
  193. m&m Ash: I want to see if there's something actionable now first
  194. Steffen Larsen isn't there any requirements for updates of xeps?
  195. m&m Steffen Larsen: 143 provides woefully little requirements on this front
  196. m&m and I'm not aware of any others still in existence
  197. m&m so actions
  198. Ash 143 has a whole section about generating patch files
  199. Steffen Larsen m&m that should be further specified.. that would ease the workload ALOT!
  200. Steffen Larsen Ash: reading
  201. Ash Section 4
  202. Ash Although it uses the term "prefers"
  203. m&m Ash: yes, but I think this is inadequate, and assumes a specific work flow
  204. m&m I'm happy to work on an update to this to be more forceful on the patchfile requirements
  205. Steffen Larsen cool
  206. m&m so that's one action (-:
  207. Steffen Larsen would be good
  208. Steffen Larsen ha ha yes
  209. m&m how about others? Should we approach Council and Board with anything right now?
  210. Steffen Larsen Guys.. I need to get out of here and get some food
  211. m&m or should we draft a new XEP? Or a proposed update to -0001?
  212. m&m Steffen Larsen: I'm trying to end this quickly (-:
  213. Steffen Larsen propose an update for 0001 would be great
  214. Steffen Larsen ok.. waiting 1 min more. ;-)
  215. Ash Update to 0001 makes most sense to me
  216. m&m anyone else?
  217. m&m ok, that's two for an update to 0001
  218. m&m alright, so by next week we should think about who's willing to work on said patch
  219. Steffen Larsen ok. bye guys
  220. m&m s/think about/decide on/
  221. Lloyd later!
  222. Ash :)
  223. Steffen Larsen cheers and see you next week
  224. Steffen Larsen :-)
  225. m&m I think that's it, unless you y'all have something else?
  226. m&m er … s/you//
  227. Steffen Larsen has left
  228. Ash I can't think what to make for dinner. Does that count?
  229. m&m heh
  230. zeank@jwchat.org lol
  231. m&m I'm going to rule that one out of scope (-:
  232. m&m ok, so that's it
  233. m&m dings bell
  234. m&m thanks everyone
  235. Ash m&m have they taken your gavel away?
  236. zeank@jwchat.org bye bye
  237. zeank@jwchat.org has left
  238. Ash Bye everyone!
  239. m&m Ash: I like to change things up
  240. Ash :)
  241. m&m maybe next week it'll be a schrödinger observation (-:
  242. stpeter oops, I wandered off because I thought we were done :-)
  243. m&m we are now (-:
  244. Simon has left
  245. Lloyd has left
  246. Steffen Larsen has joined
  247. Steffen Larsen has left
  248. stpeter yeah yeah yeah
  249. m&m I've got a start on updates to xep-README on my gitorius fork
  250. m&m all of it is breaking out the "login to webserver, and" steps into separate <li/>'s
  251. m&m since I keep skipping things in those lists!
  252. stpeter yeah I threw those together quickly before the first editor team meeting
  253. stpeter I knew they needed to be broken out separately
  254. stpeter m&m: shall I add anyone else as list admins?
  255. m&m I think winfried offered to help with moderation
  256. m&m Steffan, Lloyd, and Ash were concentrating on automation
  257. m&m wonders off for lunch before addressing draft-miller-xmpp-e2e feedback
  258. stpeter yep
  259. stpeter I'll add winfried then
  260. stpeter spread the joy :-)
  261. Ash has left
  262. stpeter has left
  263. m&m has left