XMPP Council - 2010-09-20


  1. Tobias has joined

  2. Tobias has left

  3. Kev has joined

  4. jkhii has joined

  5. Tobias has joined

  6. Fritzy has joined

  7. stpeter has joined

  8. stpeter

    hiya

  9. Kev

    Evening.

  10. stpeter

    how goes it?

  11. Kev

    43minutes by my watch :)

  12. stpeter

    time check verified, sir!

  13. Kev

    I've actually read the protoXEPs in advance, it must be a Monday :)

  14. Fritzy

    :)

  15. Kev

    stpeter: I gave waqas r/o access to the repo, btw, when he asked earlier. Said he didn't need r/w yet.

  16. stpeter

    ok

  17. stpeter

    WFM

  18. Tobias

    what's r/o?

  19. Kev

    read/only

  20. Tobias

    ahh :)

  21. MattJ has joined

  22. MattJ

    Doesn't everyone have read access?

  23. Kev

    Not through ssh.

  24. Kev

    And we've not set up a public mirror yet afaik.

  25. Tobias

    Kev: gitosis only manages access to the repo, right?

  26. Kev

    Yes.

  27. Kev

    Why or what were you wondering about?

  28. Tobias

    since we seem to have no git savvy email post commit hook notification expert around i'm making myself one :)

  29. Kev

    Does such a thing not exist already?

  30. Tobias

    it does

  31. Tobias

    it just needs to be activated by someone :)

  32. Tobias

    k..i wonder if that work

  33. Tobias

    *works

  34. Kooda has joined

  35. stpeter

    of the Council members, I see Ralph and Remko online, with Matthew being awat

  36. stpeter

    away even

  37. Fritzy

    I'm here too

  38. Kev

    Yep, got 15mins though.

  39. stpeter

    just noting :)

  40. ralphm has joined

  41. stpeter wanders off for tea

  42. ralphm slowly gets back into action after a well-deserved-but-way-too-short holiday

  43. Kev

    Mine was a week.

  44. Kev

    Well, 4 days away.

  45. ralphm

    yeah, mine was 7 workingdays

  46. ralphm

    including today

  47. ralphm

    but we had a colo outage over the weekend

  48. ralphm

    so...

  49. MattJ is back

  50. MattJ

    Timed dinner just right :)

  51. stpeter

    heh

  52. Kev

    Just enough time for me to brb before 7.

  53. Kev

    And we're on.

  54. MattJ

    Has anyone poked Remko?

  55. Kev

    I've reminded him at 14 minutes and 0 minutes.

  56. MattJ

    Fair enough

  57. Kev

    I expect he'll be along, he acked the 14minute reminder.

  58. remko has joined

  59. remko

    howdy

  60. Kev

    There.

  61. MattJ

    Yay :)

  62. Kev

    1) Roll call.

  63. Kev

    Sausage bap.

  64. Fritzy

    here

  65. Kev

    Also: all here.

  66. Fritzy

    <presence />

  67. Kev

    2) Agenda bashing.

  68. ralphm

    woot!

  69. stpeter wanders back in

  70. MattJ

    None

  71. Fritzy

    current agenda is ok

  72. remko

    none

  73. Kev

    3) ProtoXEP - Spim Markers and Reports: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/spim.html

  74. Kev

    Accept as a XEP?

  75. waqas has joined

  76. Kev

    I had various comments to make about this, but nothing to stop us throwing it up as Experimental.

  77. Fritzy

    I have a lot of problems with it

  78. ralphm

    oh, the evil bit

  79. MattJ waits to hear Fritzy's problems

  80. ralphm

    I thought we already had a spec for that

  81. Kev

    ralphm: Yes.

  82. Fritzy

    I'm going to vote -1 and email to the list my comments

  83. Kev

    Ok - this is substantial stuff that can't be sorted out while it's on the vine, then?

  84. Fritzy

    Well, sure -- let me go stream of thought

  85. ralphm

    http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0076.html

  86. stpeter

    heh

  87. Kev

    I'd rather we had something we could put in the minutes as a reason for rejecting it :)

  88. ralphm

    I see many things wrong with this spec even at a glance

  89. Fritzy

    I don't like the filters extending the presence stanza

  90. ralphm

    like abusing presence for pubsub

  91. MattJ

    ralphm, eh?

  92. ralphm

    Fritzy: fools seldom differ

  93. Fritzy

    ?

  94. ralphm

    MattJ: like example 3

  95. ralphm

    this is clearly a horrible way to do things

  96. MattJ

    ralphm, I don't see why... it's not abusing presence for pubsub

  97. MattJ

    Those tags could be on a message stanza too

  98. Fritzy

    Also, I don't see how a complaint actually associates itself with what it is complaining about -- maybe I'm missing something here?

  99. ralphm

    it is, it is soliciting a subscription for stuff through presence

  100. MattJ

    Fritzy, the "key" attribute

  101. stpeter

    OT hmph, did we not add this meeting to the calendar?

  102. MattJ

    stpeter, if you didn't and I didn't then I guess not

  103. stpeter

    oops

  104. Fritzy

    MattJ: the key is associated with the subscription to the filter -- not the stanza it is complaining about

  105. Fritzy

    MattJ: or am I really missing something big here?

  106. MattJ

    ralphm, no, you're missing it...

  107. MattJ

    ralphm, that's a normal subscription request from one user to another user

  108. MattJ

    The <report> elements are to tell the recipient where to report spim to

  109. waqas

    stpeter: I'd also request notifications posted on identi.ca for council meetings. I always miss the meetings.

  110. MattJ

    They are inserted by the filters as the stanza passes through

  111. ralphm

    MattJ: I understand that

  112. Kev

    waqas: I'm not opposed to that. Although I'd rather I didn't have to remember it.

  113. MattJ

    Fritzy, subscription to the filter?

  114. Kev

    Something for AOB.

  115. ralphm

    anyway

  116. dwd has joined

  117. Fritzy

    I don't see what the complaint is for since it only contains to the key to the filter subscription.

  118. MattJ

    What filter subscription?

  119. Fritzy

    example 3

  120. dwd

    [log URI?]

  121. MattJ

    Fritzy, Read what I said to ralphm above

  122. MattJ

    You and he need to read the XEP again I suspect :)

  123. ralphm

    I believe we once figured out a way to discover special addresses at servers

  124. ralphm

    e.g. for reaching admins and what not

  125. Fritzy

    ah

  126. Fritzy

    ok

  127. Fritzy

    I get that now

  128. ralphm

    I think that should cover it

  129. MattJ

    Fritzy, to be clear that stanza is just an example, it could also be a <message>

  130. Fritzy

    so you're complaining about a specific jid

  131. MattJ

    Obviously if 2 *council members* don't understand this then the XEP needs clarifying :)

  132. Kev

    For what it's worth, I didn't think this was anything like as bad as you two do.

  133. Tobias

    MattJ: or the xep needs to wait for a new council ;)

  134. MattJ

    No, I like it... it's simple, and fits well with the other XEPs we have

  135. Fritzy

    MattJ: or wait, you're complaining about the stanza that is marked with a key.

  136. MattJ

    Fritzy, yes, now you're getting it :)

  137. ralphm

    MattJ: maybe you are right. I am still unsure about the usefulness.

  138. Fritzy

    sounds useful to me... if a bit noisy

  139. MattJ

    For example, reports could lower entity reputation, they could automatically add to block lists, etc.

  140. Kev

    I'll agree with it being noisy, but I think you need that if you want this level of control.

  141. MattJ

    Fritzy, if you read further it says to only include these tags in certain stanzas

  142. Fritzy

    right, I see that.

  143. MattJ

    Like initial subscription requests, or messages from people not in your roster

  144. MattJ

    So yes, it's "noisy", but only where it has to be

  145. Fritzy

    There might also be a need to optionally have a form for complaints from specific filters to make it more useful.

  146. MattJ

    The alternative would be to drop per-stanza reporting, but that has issues

  147. Fritzy

    so you could explain what you're complaining about

  148. Fritzy

    or suggest an action

  149. ralphm

    I think the marking bit is ok, but I'm not very sure about soliciting reports on individual stanzas

  150. MattJ

    Yes, I think Dave may have suggested something like that on the list

  151. Kev

    Ok, so, cutting this short.

  152. Kev

    Are Fritzy and/or Ralph still -1?

  153. stpeter

    using <presence type='subscribe'/> seems odd for this purpose...

  154. MattJ

    stpeter, not you too... :)

  155. Kev

    I picked a good day to take time out to read the proposals at length, I think :)

  156. MattJ

    stpeter, that is a normal subscription request from one user to another user

  157. MattJ

    Kev, likewise :)

  158. stpeter

    anyway I can post to the list about it

  159. Kev

    So, the proposal clearly needs clarification.

  160. ralphm

    MattJ: the problem is not in the fact that it is presence, it is the fact that every stanza is littered with lists of filters that you could report a stanza to as 'spim'.

  161. MattJ

    stpeter, the "filters" inject these tags so that the recipient can know where to report the stanza to

  162. Fritzy

    stpeter: it isn't using -- it's just marking that to show how to complain about

  163. dwd

    FWIW, my general thought was that it's an interesting start, we need something like this, and this is a solidly documented proposal.

  164. Kev

    The question is if Fritzy and Ralph are still vetoing it.

  165. MattJ

    dwd, I agree

  166. Kev

    There are much less well-written protoXEPs.

  167. MattJ is +1

  168. ralphm

    dwd: true

  169. Kev

    Several are sitting in my outbox.

  170. dwd

    The details could be a lot better, but it's a step in the right direction and a solid base.

  171. ralphm

    dwd: would you implement something like this?

  172. stpeter

    however, I am almost always in favor of publication to get discussion going, put the spec into source control, etc.

  173. ralphm

    MattJ: ?

  174. Kev

    ralphm: I'd strongly consider it (client)

  175. MattJ

    ralphm, yes?

  176. stpeter

    not that I have vote at the moment :)

  177. Kev

    Ok, this item is going on much too long.

  178. ralphm

    I am trying to get a feel of the demand for something like this

  179. Kev

    Fritzy: Are you still -1?

  180. Kev

    ralphm: Are you still -1?

  181. MattJ

    ralphm, I'd implement it

  182. MattJ

    For sure

  183. Fritzy

    I'm no longer vetoing it for experimental, but I think it warrants some cleanup and discussion.

  184. dwd

    I suspect some of our partners may be interested. I suspect we might be too. With some evolution, obviously.

  185. Kev

    Spam filtering is something that would really interest me to implement server-side.

  186. ralphm

    I'm 0

  187. dwd

    Fritzy, Oh, for sure.

  188. MattJ

    We've accepted far worse protoXEPs... :)

  189. Kev

    Appeals to my past life as a labrat.

  190. Kev

    Ok, excellent.

  191. MattJ

    Yay

  192. dwd

    Kev, Just *don't* mention it to David...

  193. Kev

    The XEP Editor can publish, and we'll free-for-all on the standards list.

  194. Fritzy

    yeah, so when will this be in M-link?

  195. Fritzy

    ;)

  196. Kev

    dwd: Could get interesting.

  197. Kev

    4) ProtoXEP - Bidirectional Server-to-Server Connections. http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/bidi.html

  198. Kev

    Accept?

  199. MattJ

    +1

  200. ralphm

    +1

  201. Kev

    I object to the formatting of example 3 breaking the XML highlighter, but am in favour.

  202. MattJ

    Only time has stopped me implementing this

  203. Kev

    I've already complained to one of the authors about that :)

  204. ralphm

    dwd: I'm curious about idleness and disconnects

  205. dwd

    This is Fippo's write-up of my suggestion of resolving Justin's issue as raised in 2003 or something.

  206. Fritzy

    Definitely +1

  207. Fritzy

    we need to get somethign out there that solves this.

  208. Kev

    remko:?

  209. remko

    +1

  210. ralphm

    dwd: did you think about that yet?

  211. dwd

    ralphm, I believe that's unaffected. Indeed, I think it's much easier to manage idleness and 198 and things with bidi.

  212. Kev

    5) New term applications reminder.

  213. dwd

    ralphm, For a start, doing ping-checks across S2S is a PITA.

  214. MattJ

    Reminded, thanks :)

  215. dwd

    ralphm, (without bidi)

  216. stpeter notices that Kev is in 30-minute-meeting mode

  217. Kev

    Just a reminder to anyone thinking of reapplying or applying that the application period will close in a touch over a week.

  218. remko

    ok

  219. Kev

    stpeter: Kev is *always* in 30min meeting mode.

  220. Kev

    Or ideall 20.

  221. MattJ

    dwd, it's not when you have send_iq() :)

  222. Kev

    6) Date of next meeting.

  223. Kev

    Fritzy: Mondays are difficult for you - when is less difficult?

  224. dwd

    MattJ, No, because the response still comes back over a different socket.

  225. MattJ

    dwd, doesn't matter... it means the one you sent on is fine

  226. Fritzy

    Tues-Fri any other time is less difficult

  227. Kev

    Fritzy: Any *other* time?

  228. Kev

    Implying this time is bad any day?

  229. dwd

    MattJ, Track that over a cluster...

  230. MattJ

    dwd, I shall do some day :)

  231. Fritzy

    Monday afternoon or Tues-Fri any time.

  232. ralphm

    Fritzy: UTC times, please

  233. Kev

    Later than this is a nuisance for me, and I suspect other .eu people, although I could manage an hour later ok I think.

  234. Fritzy

    +2 hrs than this or Tues-Fri

  235. waqas has left

  236. Fritzy

    I'm fine with next Monday same time though

  237. Fritzy

    just as a tendency

  238. ralphm

    :-)

  239. Fritzy

    I often have meetings on Monday morning

  240. Kev

    Ok.

  241. Fritzy

    and other catch-up

  242. stpeter

    is it worth working this out before the new Council is elected?

  243. Kev

    Well, does anyone have difficulty with Tuesday, at the same time?

  244. ralphm

    stpeter: my thought

  245. Fritzy

    stpeter: yeah, I'm fine with working this out in the next council if I'm still on

  246. ralphm

    lets just finish the term with this slot

  247. Kev

    stpeter: There are enough weeks left that if 20% of Council can't make the meetings, it's probably worth sorting IMO.

  248. stpeter

    (if there is a new Council considering that http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board_and_Council_Elections_2010 is empty!)

  249. ralphm

    woops

  250. MattJ

    :D

  251. ralphm copy/pastes

  252. Fritzy

    haha

  253. Kev

    stpeter: My app's written, but not linked.

  254. stpeter

    darn, I was hoping to be elected the Council-of-One :)

  255. Fritzy

    let's just do Monday next week for now

  256. Fritzy

    same time same bat-channel

  257. Kev

    Ok.

  258. remko

    ok

  259. Kev

    Any other business?

  260. ralphm

    stpeter: you're running?

  261. Kev

    Calendaring and microblogs from waqas.

  262. Fritzy

    yay

  263. ralphm

    oh

  264. ralphm

    application for fosdem

  265. Kev

    k.

  266. Kev

    So, Matt - are you still (generally) doing the calendar entries?

  267. ralphm

    we want the full shebang again?

  268. stpeter

    ralphm: I was going to if no one else did, that way I could dispense with all this democratic-process nonsense :)

  269. Kev

    ralphm: Let's do the other first.

  270. ralphm

    Kev: ok

  271. MattJ

    Kev, I was, then stpeter was... that got me out of the habit :)

  272. MattJ

    I can start reminding myself again

  273. Kev

    Ok.

  274. Kev

    Who wants to announce on identi.ca?

  275. ralphm

    wait what?

  276. Kev

    Is there an XSF account?

  277. MattJ

    stpeter is busy enough that we should ban him from trivial things like editing calendars

  278. Kev

    Do we want to do this?

  279. stpeter

    if it's in the calendar, people will tend to remember it

  280. MattJ

    There is an XSF account

  281. stpeter

    Kev: there is

  282. Fritzy

    I believe there is an XSF account on identi.ca

  283. ralphm

    do what?

  284. Kev

    Announce meetings on identi.ca - it was waqas's suggestion earlier.

  285. ralphm

    ah

  286. ralphm

    sure

  287. ralphm

    +1

  288. Kev

    I'm happy to delay such changes to process until the new Council take over.

  289. stpeter

    attendance goes up if we announce it 15 minutes before the meeting

  290. Fritzy

    xmpp uris!

  291. ralphm

    Kev: nah

  292. Kev

    But we can start doing it now

  293. Kev

    who wants to do it?

  294. ralphm

    Kev: you!

  295. stpeter

    I find myself not paying attention to identi.ca anymore :(

  296. Kev

    I guess the Chair can do it, but he's likely to forget.

  297. MattJ

    How about... I take it on, but I'll write a bot

  298. Kev

    stpeter: I've disabled the XMPP bot now, too distracting.

  299. ralphm

    MattJ: haha

  300. stpeter

    +1 to bot

  301. Kev

    MattJ: perfect, ta.

  302. Kev

    Ok.

  303. Kev

    FOSDEM:

  304. Kev

    Ralph :)

  305. ralphm

    right

  306. Kev

    Your 2 minutes start now.

  307. stpeter

    MattJ: poke me if you need the password for the XSF account

  308. ralphm

    it's that time of year again to apply for a devroom and a booth

  309. MattJ

    stpeter, I think I know it, thanks

  310. ralphm

    at FOSDEM

  311. stpeter

    k

  312. ralphm

    5/6 feb 2011

  313. Kev

    ralphm: I'm inclined to say we want the status quo.

  314. ralphm

    ok

  315. Kev

    devroom was overflowing last year.

  316. stpeter

    yeah that was fun

  317. ralphm

    Did I do the application this year?

  318. MattJ

    Heh

  319. ralphm

    I forgot

  320. ralphm

    I can do it this time, again

  321. stpeter

    yes you did

  322. stpeter

    at least, I didn't :)

  323. ralphm

    :-)

  324. Kev

    I think this is probably Board, rather than Council, mind.

  325. MattJ

    ralphm, you could always ask the assistance of the communications team if you need it :)

  326. stpeter

    Board meeting on Tuesday of this week

  327. stpeter

    we could discuss there

  328. Tobias

    dwd: a little late, just had to add an A record, but here are the logs :P http://logs.xmpp.org/muc_log/muc.xmpp.org/council/100920/

  329. ralphm

    Kev: nah, it has always been done by me, basically

  330. stpeter

    xmpp:xsf@muc.xmpp.org?join

  331. stpeter

    it's in the calendar, too

  332. ralphm

    with no particular strong binding to the xsf

  333. Fritzy

    Can bidi be extended to include dwd's multi-domain per s2s connection with signatures?

  334. Tobias set the topic to

    XMPP Council Room | http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Radar | http://logs.xmpp.org/muc_log/muc.xmpp.org/council/

  335. stpeter

    ralphm: right

  336. ralphm

    although we always went as such

  337. stpeter

    ralphm: and I'm fine with that!

  338. Tobias set the topic to

    XMPP Council Room | http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Radaras

  339. MattJ

    Tobias, sensible URLs for the logs? You deserve a bonus :)

  340. MattJ

    Tobias, I couldn't get that working

  341. Tobias

    MattJ: i didn't do nothing :)

  342. Tobias

    just had the record added :D

  343. ralphm

    just more of a reminder, and I'm wondering if we plan to do a summit again

  344. Kev

    ralphm: Well, if we get a room, I'm happy.

  345. Tobias

    MattJ: config and all was already there

  346. MattJ

    We're doing a summit if we can get somewhere with windows, I think

  347. Kev

    I'd hope we'd do a summit again, although that needs (probably Board) volunteers to arrange.

  348. ralphm

    MattJ: +1

  349. Kev

    Right, windows would be nice. Internets even nicer.

  350. MattJ

    We've been underground far too long :)

  351. stpeter

    I've heard that I can get a free meeting room at a Cisco location near the airport (not in the center)

  352. Kev

    stpeter: I think that's worth strongly considering.

  353. stpeter

    but I need to ask and get that organized

  354. stpeter

    to see if it's doable

  355. Kev

    Could someone ask Board to discuss this tomorrow, please?

  356. stpeter

    yes

  357. Tobias

    MattJ: but i guess it would be nice to eliminate the the mud_log/muc.xmpp.org parts..it blows the whole thing up and there aren't any other muc components running

  358. Kev

    Ta.

  359. MattJ

    Tobias, +1

  360. stpeter

    Board meetings are open, BTW

  361. Kev

    I think we're out of agenda items then, unless there's AOAOB.

  362. MattJ

    I'm done

  363. Kev

    stpeter: I'll be trying to remember to attend.

  364. Kev

    I'll knock out the minutes tomorrow morning, probably.

  365. ralphm hands the gavel

  366. Kev

    Ok, we're done then

  367. Kev bangs the gavel.

  368. Kev

    Thanks all.

  369. MattJ

    Thanks

  370. ralphm

    hooray

  371. Fritzy

    Kev/stpeter: has there been any progress made on multi-domain and single cert + signatures per s2s connection?

  372. remko

    thanks

  373. stpeter

    Kev: added to http://typewith.me/EyJg4G3XSr

  374. ralphm

    oh, fosdem also requests ideas for main track speakers

  375. Kev

    stpeter: ta.

  376. Fritzy

    aka: the gtalk problem

  377. ralphm

    not something I've done, but if anyone wants to speak...

  378. stpeter

    Fritzy: see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-xmpp-dna-00

  379. Fritzy

    stpeter: thanks

  380. stpeter

    Fritzy: there is also http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xmpp-dna-00 (expired), but the doc from Richard Barnes incorporates discussion at the meeting in Maastricht in late July

  381. Fritzy

    cool

  382. MattJ

    ralphm, I'd likely forget to take my coat off ;)

  383. stpeter

    Kev: will you have time to write up minutes for this meeting? any other volunteers?

  384. Kev

    Isode are fairly kind people, I'll do it tomorrow morning.

  385. Kev

    Unless someone else has a burning desire to get involved!

  386. stpeter

    :)

  387. stpeter

    I might find time to do it this evening (Mountain Time)

  388. stpeter

    but not before then

  389. stpeter

    brb

  390. Fritzy

    stpeter: thanks!

  391. Kev

    stpeter: If you want to beat me to it, feel free.

  392. Tobias

    k..would be handy if one of those *admin folk* would add this to the topic line: http://logs.xmpp.org/council

  393. MattJ set the topic to

    XMPP Council Room | http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Radar | Room logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council

  394. MattJ

    It's not happy with that... the URLs it directs to are wrong

  395. Tobias

    works for me

  396. Kev

    Not for me.

  397. Tobias

    http://logs.xmpp.org/100714/ <-- this is wrong indeed :)

  398. Kev

    You end up trying http://logs.xmpp.org/100920/council/council/council/council/council/council/

  399. Kev

    Before deciding that no matter how many times you press it, it won't work.

  400. stpeter

    heh

  401. Tobias

    Kev: what did you do to get that?

  402. MattJ

    I'll probably look at that, the person who wrote the code originally has gone AWOL :)

  403. Kev

    Clicked today's tade, then clicked council

  404. Kev

    then clicked council

  405. Kev

    then clicked council

  406. Kev

    etc.

  407. ralphm

    FOSDEM this year marks a preference for 'encompassing topics'

  408. ralphm

    shall I suggest related, open protocols as a possible grander theme?

  409. Kev

    Isn't that always our grander theme?

  410. Tobias

    Kev: the link seems to have to have a / at the end

  411. Tobias

    mind changing that in the topic?

  412. ralphm

    Kev: sure, but we've always 'marketed' the room as xmpp specific

  413. Kev

    Ah, I see.

  414. ralphm

    even though our community is clearly broader in interest

  415. Kev

    Well, we could do extensible social stuff.

  416. Tobias set the topic to

    XMPP Council Room | http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Radar | Room logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/

  417. ralphm

    they might then opt to have a bigger room and hook us up with other open protocols people

  418. ralphm

    which I think is nice

  419. ralphm

    (and we do the summit, too)

  420. Kev

    I think our tie to open social stuff is more useful than our tie to generic open protocols.

  421. Kev

    open social protocols works.

  422. ralphm

    nod

  423. ralphm

    that'd be the thing

  424. ralphm

    most of the talk on open protocols revolves around this topic anyway

  425. Kev

    Well, they should all be using XMPP, so sure :D

  426. ralphm

    oauth, openid, discovery thingies, etc.

  427. ralphm

    haha

  428. Tobias

    Kev: mind adding a / to the log url at top?

  429. ralphm

    application done

  430. MattJ set the topic to

    XMPP Council Room | http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Radar | Room logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/

  431. Tobias

    thanks kev

  432. MattJ

    np

  433. stpeter wanders off to run an errand...

  434. MattJ

    Tobias, without '/' should probably redirect

  435. MattJ

    I'll add that to the tracker

  436. MattJ

    (prosody-modules tracker, that is)

  437. Tobias

    ok :)

  438. Tobias

    since i tried that and failed pretty fast and though i should give up pretty fast too

  439. Tobias

    :P

  440. MattJ

    :)

  441. ralphm has left

  442. Tobias

    MattJ: do you have admin access to the MLs?

  443. Kev

    I do.

  444. MattJ

    No, thankfully

  445. Tobias

    Kev: could you tell me if there's something in xmpp-commit moderation queue?

  446. Kev

    Peter normally manages them, mind.

  447. Tobias

    since i pushed something to the repo and it was supposed to send a mail to there

  448. Kev

    what's the mailing list address?

  449. Kev

    xmpp-commit@xmpp.org?

  450. Kev

    Gottit, nevermind.

  451. Tobias

    k

  452. Kev

    Now, let's work out what the password is.

  453. Kev

    I don't see any pending mails.

  454. Tobias

    strange

  455. Tobias

    i've added the mailinglist = foo stuff to the hook section of the repo config

  456. Tobias

    and enabled the post-receive hook

  457. mlundblad has joined

  458. mlundblad

    was there a council meeting tonight?

  459. remko

    yes

  460. Tobias

    remko: btw: did you get your prosody issues sorted out?

  461. remko

    mattj is on it, as always

  462. remko

    it's related to xep-198

  463. Tobias

    ah.ok

  464. MattJ

    remko, btw... I found no broken hashes in my contact list

  465. MattJ

    Well, actually I found 2... let me send that email, I'm getting like waqas :)

  466. remko

    you found no broken hashes, but actually 2?

  467. remko

    that doesn't sound like 'no' to me :)

  468. Tobias

    more noish :)

  469. remko

    yes, my contact list is also clean, but the latest adium beta has a bug

  470. remko

    and i suspect jabbim and jabber2jabber as well

  471. Tobias

    latest? the one released yesterday?

  472. remko

    oh darn, was there a release yesterday?

  473. Tobias

    yup

  474. Tobias

    1.4b19

  475. remko

    ah yes, it was a beta

  476. remko

    actually, i even tried the nightly, same problem

  477. Tobias

    k

  478. remko

    and jabber2jabber uses gloox i'm told

  479. remko

    so that seems to be aligned with mattj's mail

  480. MattJ

    Yes... Spectrum also uses gloox, and it's likely the same issue

  481. MattJ

    since someone found that Spectrum contacts report as invalid also

  482. MattJ

    It generates a correct hash, but doesn't add any features to the disco results when a node is included

  483. remko

    jabber2jabber uses spectrum

  484. remko

    right, adium has a similar problem

  485. remko

    it hashes correctly, but doesn't update the hash if you add some features

  486. MattJ

    Ah

  487. remko

    that's the price you pay for caching ;-)

  488. remko

    bugs

  489. remko

    :)

  490. remko

    anyway, i'm off, ttyl

  491. remko has left

  492. MattJ

    Prosody caches it too, but it regenerates for every new feature added/removed :)

  493. MattJ

    Heh

  494. Kooda has left

  495. Tobias has left

  496. Tobias has joined

  497. mlundblad has left

  498. stpeter has left

  499. Tobias has left

  500. jkhii has left

  501. Kev has left