XMPP Council - 2010-05-10

  1. Tobias has joined

  2. Tobias has left

  3. Tobias has joined

  4. Tobias has left

  5. Tobias has joined

  6. Tobias has left

  7. Tobias has joined

  8. Tobias has left

  9. Tobias has joined

  10. stpeter has joined

  11. Kev has joined

  12. Kev has left

  13. Kev has joined

  14. Kev


  15. stpeter

    hi Kev!!! ;-)

  16. Kev

    I'm glad that my suggestion that we skip a week so I wouldn't bother turning up for a meeting on holiday was turned down because it's too important that we have a Council meeting every week.

  17. Kev

    I'm also glad I made the effort to be here.

  18. stpeter


  19. stpeter

    you get a gold star!

  20. stpeter

    Kev: would you like me to draft warning text for the message archiving spec?

  21. Kev

    Oh, right, that's still on my list.

  22. stpeter

    I'm pushing on the tech review team regarding the file transfer specs

  23. Kev

    I'm happy for you to do it if you have the time, I'm unlikely to get to it this week (or next, which looks horrendously busy).

  24. stpeter

    I suppose that Ralph and I need to coordinate about pubsub

  25. Kev

    I saw you pushing for the file transfer review, thanks.

  26. Kev

    I have a comment about MUC, unhelpfully.

  27. stpeter

    is it just me or is there a lack of energy of late?

  28. Kev

    Which is that the disco identity for a room is the same as for a service, which isn't that helpful when you're trying to discover rooms.

  29. stpeter nods

  30. stpeter

    good point

  31. Kev

    (In fact, in the registry there's an entry for a directory of rooms, but MUC doesn't use this, in favour of conference for both service and room)

  32. stpeter

    XEP-0045 was defined soon after XEP-0030 and we didn't have a clear idea of how to use disco at the time

  33. Kev

    Yes, there's a definite lack of energy within the XSF at the moment.

  34. stpeter

    ok, at least I'm not the only one who thinks so

  35. Kev

    For me too, because I've been trying to head-down and get Swift done.

  36. stpeter

    nothing says we need to maintain the XSF

  37. stpeter

    we could put it in maintenance mode :)

  38. Kev

    I think it serves a purpose, it just needs to one of these re-imagining movies that seems to be the rage these days.

  39. stpeter


  40. Kev

    So, as the only Council member here, and despite not having quorum, I'm going to declare that there's no meeting next week, and that the next meeting will be 1800GMT 24th May.

  41. Tobias

    maintenance mode?

  42. ralphm has joined

  43. Kev

    Evening Ralph.

  44. Tobias

    Kev: someone should put it in the calendar this time ;)

  45. ralphm

    eh, wow. I got messages from the future

  46. Kev

    Tobias: MattJ volunteered to keep the calendar up to date for us.

  47. stpeter

    Tobias: sure, like we don't do any new work, just maintain the old stuff

  48. Tobias

    stpeter: ahh :)

  49. stpeter

    I thought I added this one to the calendar

  50. ralphm

    could somebody set up ntp for our server?

  51. Tobias

    stpeter: there is an entry for last week

  52. stpeter

    Tobias: you're right

  53. stpeter

    now I'll set up an entry for next week :P

  54. Kev

    ralphm: it seems to be correct.

  55. Tobias

    i thought there is no meeting next week

  56. Tobias


  57. Kev

    Comparing it to my NTP-configured machine at home.

  58. stpeter

    or the week after

  59. Kev

    Tobias: correct. No meeting next week, meeting the week after.

  60. ralphm

    Kev: odd, I got messages from 20:12 in the history when I joined

  61. Kev

    So there was one today, 10th May. None 17th May. Next is 24th May

  62. stpeter

    Kev: got it

  63. stpeter will be flying to New York on the 24th

  64. Kev

    stpeter: glamorous.

  65. ralphm

    What's there?

  66. stpeter

    Kev: IESG retreat, not so glamorous ;-)

  67. ralphm

    Hutje op de hei?

  68. Kev

    Anyway, it's over 10 minutes now, we've only got Ralph and me, so no quorum.

  69. stpeter

    I checked in changes to council/events.xml

  70. Kev

    I'll send out not-minutes saying as such, telling people we're skipping next week.

  71. Kev

    Thanks Peter.

  72. Kev

    I'll then go and enjoy my week off.

  73. stpeter

    Kev: enjoy!

  74. ralphm

    Sorry, my train was delayed

  75. stpeter

    ralphm: how would you like to work on XEP-0060?

  76. ralphm

    After 1.13?

  77. stpeter

    no, for 1.13

  78. stpeter

    we need to de-delete some stuff

  79. stpeter

    things that were in 1.12

  80. ralphm


  81. Kev has left

  82. ralphm

    I thought we might be able to just revert some commits

  83. ralphm


  84. Kev has joined

  85. stpeter

    ralphm: I doubt it will be quite that easy

  86. ralphm


  87. Kev

    Right, thanks for turning up, AFK now.

  88. ralphm

    Let's see

  89. stpeter

    ralphm: if you could find line numbers in the diff from 1.12 then I can revert those changes

  90. stpeter

    that would be http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0060/diff/1.12/vs/1.13rc13 I suppose

  91. stpeter

    (or section numbers)

  92. ralphm

    I could extract both versions and run it through meld

  93. ralphm

    selectively copying diffs back and forth

  94. ralphm

    and then commit

  95. stpeter

    sure that would be fine

  96. ralphm

    I wonder if I still have an account

  97. stpeter

    I think we're talking about a few small sections of the document

  98. nathan has joined

  99. ralphm


  100. stpeter

    heck, if you tell me which sections I can find the appropriate diffs from 1.12

  101. stpeter

    hi nathan!

  102. nathan

    Howdy. :/ Sorry I'm late.

  103. stpeter

    nathan: this meeting didn't get into the calendar

  104. ralphm

    reaching quorum here

  105. stpeter


  106. stpeter

    Remko is offline

  107. jkhii has joined

  108. nathan


  109. ralphm looks at the huge diff

  110. stpeter

    he's NA

  111. stpeter

    or xa

  112. Tobias

    stpeter: strangely calendars don'T seem to be builded automatically anymore

  113. Tobias

    i'll investigate that later

  114. stpeter

    Tobias: ok

  115. stpeter

    Tobias: maybe I didn't run the right script?

  116. Tobias

    the way it's supposed to work is that you don't need to run any script :)

  117. ralphm

    stpeter: at least 7.1

  118. stpeter


  119. stpeter

    ralphm: right

  120. stpeter

    so the issues were (1) batch processing and ...?

  121. stpeter

    something about subids

  122. ralphm

    sid's for pending subscriptions

  123. ralphm

    I think also 7.2

  124. ralphm

    as I see batch item retractions were removed, too

  125. ralphm


  126. ralphm


  127. stpeter


  128. ralphm

    reference [20] in Appendix G

  129. stpeter

    sure, I can just search for "batch" in the SVN history

  130. ralphm

    Oh, right ;-)

  131. ralphm

    I just happened to look in all the places, I see

  132. stpeter

    ok I shall take a look at that one evening this week

  133. ralphm

    there is also a link to result-set management that had reference 20

  134. stpeter

    then you, nathan, and I can chat about 1.13+

  135. ralphm

    and now seems to just mention a XEP number

  136. stpeter


  137. ralphm

    Ah, that's also in my notes

  138. ralphm

    As the old 20 seems to be equivalent to 19

  139. ralphm

    that could maybe merge

  140. ralphm

    but that'd mean renumbering all others, so probably not a good idea

  141. stpeter shrugs

  142. stpeter

    those are just reference numbers, I don't care about renumbering

  143. ralphm


  144. ralphm

    good thing nobody ever uses these numbers

  145. ralphm

    in legal texts they just just leave vacancies

  146. stpeter


  147. stpeter

    no lawyers here, just us geeks!

  148. ralphm


  149. ralphm

    ok cool

  150. stpeter

    on the phone, brb

  151. Kev has left

  152. stpeter has left

  153. jkhii has left

  154. Tobias has left

  155. nathan has left