XMPP Council - 2011-03-23

01:50:42 julm has left
02:03:04 julm has joined
04:53:43 bear has left
04:53:43 bear has joined
08:48:08 Kev has left
08:48:27 Kev has joined
09:25:34 Tobias has joined
12:20:51 Tobias has left
13:50:11 stpeter has joined
14:08:10 Tobias has joined
15:29:14 MattJ has joined
15:47:01 linuxwolf has joined
15:47:09 stpeter T-15 minutes?
15:47:17 MattJ Aye
15:47:19 Kev Yes please.
15:47:26 stpeter posted to identi.ca
15:47:34 stpeter I just processed the forwarding proposal, too
15:47:38 Kev !agendaappend http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding.html Accept as XEP?
15:47:38 Kanchil+ Kev: Done.
15:47:43 Kev stpeter: So I saw :)
15:47:44 MattJ Thanks :)
15:47:52 Kev Indeed, murky.
15:48:02 stpeter also, I received a bug report on the XEP-0198 schema so I processed that just now
15:48:04 Florob has joined
15:48:05 linuxwolf cutting the submission awfully close (-:
15:48:07 waqas has joined
15:48:10 stpeter heh
15:48:17 stpeter could be considered next week or week after
15:48:24 MattJ It's a small XEP!
15:48:29 MattJ But really, I don't mind :)
15:48:37 linuxwolf "I don't know if I can consider it at this late stage…"
15:48:40 Kev It is a small XEP, and Peter announced that Council would vote today, so I have to put it on the agenda :)
15:48:43 linuxwolf j/k… (-:
15:49:08 stpeter I haven't looked at how the new http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding.html differs from the old http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding-delivery.html and http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding-request.html
15:49:31 stpeter brb
15:50:31 Kev stpeter: It's just an encapsulation format (unlike forwarding-request) to be used in other XEPs (like the upcoming Message Archive Management), and it's a straightforward complete encapsulation, unlike forwarding-deliver.
15:51:15 linuxwolf mmmm….competing specs!
15:52:09 linuxwolf Kev: and I have yet another BCP I'd like to propose
15:52:12 Kev I have people working on the 'back yard' at the moment, so I'm sorry if I have to vanish at an inopportune moment for a couple of minutes.
15:52:18 Kev linuxwolf: Good. You have 9 minutes.
15:52:43 MattJ Hey, that's not fair
15:52:45 linuxwolf (optional) version info via caps URL
15:53:09 linuxwolf MattJ: do you see me presenting an actual spec? (-:
15:53:55 MattJ linuxwolf, thankfully no, I want to hold the record for shortest submission->vote->acceptance for at least a short time :)
15:54:30 linuxwolf in that case, I might just have to defer acceptance… (-:<
15:54:53 MattJ You wouldn't :(
15:54:58 linuxwolf is feeling snarky
15:55:15 Kev I hope snarky is over-age, then.
15:55:33 linuxwolf MattJ: use of reverse smileys may dissuade me from delay
15:55:48 MattJ ☺
15:56:09 Kev (-:<
15:56:12 stpeter aha, I see what you're after in http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding.html -- that's quite straightforward
15:56:52 Florob 😸
15:56:53 stpeter the old specs were about stanza forwarding a la .forward
15:57:07 Kev Right.
15:57:23 Kev So e.g. carbons should use this format.
15:57:34 Kev As ideal, should the ad-hoc for forwarding unread messages.
15:57:40 Kev As should 136bis
15:57:57 stpeter +1 to 136bis
15:57:58 linuxwolf well, carbons could use the older forwarding specs, too
15:58:21 MattJ 136bis is on the way... I know because one of the few remaining todo items is "choose a title" :)
15:58:28 stpeter I was mentioning just yesterday how we need to de-ian-ize certain specs like 136
15:58:38 linuxwolf but I prefer the form from Messers WIld and Smith
15:58:39 stpeter (mentioning to linuxwolf that is)
15:58:42 Kev Matt's approach is to deny 136 ever existing. :)
15:58:44 linuxwolf lol
15:58:50 Kev Which suits me fine.
15:59:08 MattJ It's not like it's seen wide adoption (and it's not hard to see why)
15:59:28 MattJ I'm mostly excited about the new protocol simply because finally people might implement archiving
15:59:39 linuxwolf maybe
15:59:48 linuxwolf (-:
15:59:52 stpeter I just invited Fritzy
15:59:52 MattJ I'd love it to become a more mainstream feature - it's a really common request from users
15:59:56 fritzy has joined
16:00:02 stpeter :)
16:00:04 stpeter hi Nathan!
16:00:06 linuxwolf it definitely is
16:00:07 Kev MattJ: Well, I want it in Swift, at least. Especially when used with the rest of the multi-resource stuff.
16:00:08 MattJ That, and "I want my conversations to appear in all my clients"
16:00:11 stpeter no sign of Mr. Meijer
16:00:29 fritzy Howdy
16:00:30 Kev I have to AFK for a moment, I'll be back within 2mins or so.
16:00:36 stpeter MattJ: forwarding is a really common request, or history?
16:00:43 linuxwolf history
16:00:58 linuxwolf (logging, auditing, caching, ....)
16:01:00 MattJ stpeter, history
16:01:01 stpeter nod
16:01:05 stpeter just checking
16:02:25 MattJ Forwarding would be a nice addition to clients in itself, but I suspect users are just going to continue with their copying and their pasting :)
16:02:33 Kev Right.
16:02:40 Kev Let's start :)
16:02:44 Kev !agendaup
16:02:44 Kanchil+ Kev: -9) Fini.
16:02:49 Kev !agendaup 10
16:02:49 Kanchil+ Kev: 1) Roll call
16:03:06 linuxwolf here
16:03:11 MattJ Here
16:03:14 fritzy howdy
16:03:17 fritzy I mean here
16:03:34 Kev !agendaup
16:03:34 Kanchil+ Kev: 2) Agenda bashing
16:03:56 linuxwolf request to talk about caps
16:04:04 linuxwolf )(see above)
16:04:14 Kev Is that a real item or AOB? :)
16:04:21 linuxwolf it can be an AOB
16:04:24 Kev Ok.
16:04:26 Kev Anyone else?
16:04:39 fritzy nossir
16:04:40 stpeter it's hard to bash an agenda that we can't see :)
16:04:41 MattJ Nope
16:04:47 MattJ Gah, brb 60 sec
16:04:52 fritzy we're blind?
16:04:55 Kev stpeter: Well, I sent it out earlier in the week.
16:05:01 Kev Plus the item you added today :)
16:05:03 Kev But sure
16:05:04 Kev !agenda
16:05:05 Kanchil+ Kev: 1) Roll call 2) Agenda bashing 3) XEP-0065: Accept version 1.8? 4) http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/resource-locking.html Accept as XEP? 5) http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding.html Accept as XEP? 6) Date of next meeting 7) Any other business Fini
16:05:05 linuxwolf one could !agenda
16:05:08 linuxwolf heh
16:05:15 stpeter many thanks
16:05:23 remko has joined
16:05:24 stpeter seems fine to me
16:05:35 Kev !agendaup
16:05:35 Kanchil+ Kev: 3) XEP-0065: Accept version 1.8?
16:05:44 Kev I haven't reviewed the diff. I'll do so and on-list it up.
16:05:51 fritzy me neither
16:05:54 Kev I'll also wait for MattJ for a moment before moving on.
16:05:59 linuxwolf and neither have I
16:06:38 stpeter the diff is hard to read, I find
16:07:14 Kev Does anyone object to waiting for a moment for Matt to catch up?
16:07:40 stpeter fine by me
16:07:42 linuxwolf (defeaning silience)
16:07:49 linuxwolf /sigh
16:08:00 waqas chooses not to object
16:08:01 fritzy I'm easy
16:08:02 linuxwolf I've got too many docs to write today to be typoing
16:08:49 MattJ Sorry, back
16:08:56 Kev !agendaup 0
16:08:56 Kanchil+ Kev: 3) XEP-0065: Accept version 1.8?
16:09:00 Kev MattJ: ^
16:09:26 MattJ I have it open, I haven't finished reviewing it, so I'll post on-list too
16:09:33 Kev !agendaup
16:09:33 Kanchil+ Kev: 4) http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/resource-locking.html Accept as XEP?
16:09:38 Kev I don't object.
16:09:50 Kev I'm not entirely convinced by each of the details, but I don't object :)
16:10:05 fritzy +1
16:10:14 linuxwolf +1, obviously (-:
16:10:23 MattJ I don't object either, but I have some small feedback I'll post to standards@ when it's published
16:10:27 Kev Specifically, I think it should always lock when receiving a new message, rather than maybe locking and maybe unlocking.
16:10:29 stpeter BTW the most up-to-date diff for 65 is http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0065/diff/1.7/vs/1.8rc4
16:10:44 Kev I'm also not sure that <gone/> justifies an unlock, but I'm less worried about that.
16:10:56 stpeter (but it's close to unreadable)
16:11:19 linuxwolf Kev: to be fair, this is based on 10+ experience (-:
16:12:24 Kev I'm happy to not really worry about this, as I think the later multi-client XEP solves all problems ;)
16:12:25 linuxwolf (well, not specifically with <gone/> itself, but the entire concept)
16:12:35 linuxwolf we shall see (-:
16:12:38 Kev This is *almost* what we're doing in Swift.
16:12:50 Kev Apart from not bothering with gone yet, and rebinding instead of unbinding on a new message.
16:12:53 Kev Anyway.
16:12:58 Kev !agendaup
16:12:58 Kanchil+ Kev: 5) http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/forwarding.html Accept as XEP?
16:13:02 Kev +1 :)
16:13:07 linuxwolf hmmm
16:13:09 Kev The background for this:
16:13:28 Kev Matt's got a new archiving spec, there's carbons, there's an ad-hoc for forwarding messages.
16:13:39 Kev It'd be good to have a common format for the forwarded messages in each of these cases.
16:13:44 Kev Thus this spec
16:13:57 linuxwolf +1 actually
16:14:13 fritzy +1
16:14:18 linuxwolf I think I still have some security concerns, but I haven't exactly had a lot of time to read it (-:
16:14:31 Kev linuxwolf: It's a format rather than a protocol.
16:14:42 stpeter linuxwolf: sure, the interaction with signing and encryption might be "interesting"
16:14:45 Kev So I think the security concerns belong to the protocol using the format, but I could be persuaded otherwise.
16:15:11 Kev MattJ: Your vote? :)
16:15:11 linuxwolf Kev: technically, it's a protocol extension format
16:15:15 linuxwolf (-:
16:15:20 fritzy does this technically change the jabber:client ns?
16:15:27 Kev fritzy: Of course not.
16:15:28 fritzy allowing another <message /> child?
16:15:28 MattJ fritzy, it does not, why?
16:15:41 Kev jabber:client says nothing about the number of message children.
16:15:48 MattJ plus it's a child of a child
16:15:49 fritzy right, that's not what I meant
16:15:57 MattJ of another namespace
16:16:03 MattJ so another schema (forwarding) applies
16:16:07 stpeter http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3922 already had <presence/> within <presence/> (but a different namespace)
16:16:07 MattJ AIUI
16:16:22 MattJ Kev, +1 surprise, surprise! :)
16:16:24 fritzy Oh, you're right MattJ.
16:16:26 Kev Excellent.
16:16:29 Kev !agendaup
16:16:29 Kanchil+ Kev: 6) Date of next meeting
16:16:39 Kev Ok, so, daylight savings change.
16:16:43 MattJ Next week suits me
16:16:48 linuxwolf heh
16:16:51 Kev So I propose next Wednesday at 1500GMT.
16:16:56 fritzy Wed 1600 Kevin Time. If he's in an unusual timezone for him, so help us all.
16:17:14 linuxwolf notes that some of us already went through a TZ change
16:17:30 stpeter notes that he'll go through the time change again in Prague on Sunday morning
16:17:37 Kev linuxwolf: Indeed. That's why I noted just before the US started changing that we weren't shifting Council yet :)
16:17:39 MattJ 1500GMT? Why the change?
16:17:50 Kev MattJ: So it remains 4PM UK time.
16:17:53 MattJ I never change my clocks for DST :)
16:17:58 stpeter heehee
16:18:04 stpeter good for you
16:18:04 linuxwolf MattJ: that explains a lot (-:
16:18:07 MattJ Heh
16:18:22 stpeter I just use the sundial in my back yard
16:18:43 MattJ Ok, I'm happy with 1500GMT next week
16:18:43 Kev Is everyone happy with this?
16:18:46 stpeter so 15:00 GMT?
16:18:49 fritzy sure
16:18:50 MattJ or to use the sundial in stpeter's back yard
16:18:54 stpeter heh
16:19:09 stpeter edits ./council/events.xml
16:19:18 linuxwolf fine either way
16:19:27 Kev stpeter: Thanks.
16:19:32 Kev !agendaup
16:19:32 Kanchil+ Kev: 7) Any other business
16:19:38 linuxwolf ok
16:19:38 Kev linuxwolf !
16:19:47 stpeter it's doubtful that I'll attend next week's meeting
16:20:07 Steffen Larsen has joined
16:20:18 fritzy ok
16:20:20 linuxwolf so, I'd like to propose a caps URL format recommendation, if clients are interested in reporting version/platform info
16:20:21 stpeter let's see, I'll be in the CORE WG session at that time
16:20:28 Kev stpeter: Enjoy Prague :)
16:20:35 stpeter I shall, thanks :)
16:20:38 stpeter anyway
16:20:41 stpeter linuxwolf?
16:20:44 linuxwolf is slightly jealous
16:20:47 linuxwolf oh yes, so
16:20:48 stpeter we need CSN in these meetings :)
16:20:56 Kev stpeter: I said that last week.
16:21:06 linuxwolf RT: linuxwolf: so, I'd like to propose a caps URL format recommendation, if clients are interested in reporting version/platform info
16:21:21 Kev linuxwolf: Right, I'm waiting for your next line after that :)
16:21:22 MattJ linuxwolf, I don't understand, please continue
16:21:30 stpeter (calendar updated)
16:21:35 linuxwolf hold on…shooing away IRL trolls
16:21:40 stpeter heehee
16:21:51 stpeter isn't in the office today, so it's not my fault
16:22:04 MattJ Grab a piece of chalk and draw a circle around your desk
16:22:33 linuxwolf ok, so the idea is to inconspicuously indicate the version/platform via "query parameters" to the caps node URL, assuming a client sends a URL (per recommendations)
16:23:11 stpeter is favor of just about anything that kills off iq:version
16:23:22 fritzy haha
16:23:22 linuxwolf e.g. http://outer-planes.net/matts-magical-client?v=2011.03.12314&p=linux
16:23:31 MattJ loves iq:version, long live iq:version!
16:23:33 linuxwolf and doesn't impact the actual caps hash
16:23:40 stpeter :)
16:23:50 linuxwolf yeah, I'd like to see iq:version DIAF
16:24:09 MattJ linuxwolf, ok, why this?
16:24:12 waqas I would like to fix caps hashes :)
16:24:50 linuxwolf MattJ: because large organizations like to know what clients their users are logging in with, without laying down the lockout hammer
16:24:55 stpeter yes, we do need to fix the security hole that waqas found
16:25:01 linuxwolf definitely
16:25:54 Kev So, I have no particular opinion on this until I've seen some examples.
16:26:06 linuxwolf RT: linuxwolf: e.g. http://outer-planes.net/matts-magical-client?v=2011.03.12314&p=linux
16:26:11 Kev Yeees.
16:26:18 Kev I meant slightly more of an exposition than that :)
16:26:30 stpeter heh
16:26:46 stpeter looks forward to a mini-spec on the topic or a patch to 115
16:26:56 linuxwolf or, say, http://ww.cisco.com/go/jabber?v=8.0.3&p=mac
16:27:13 MattJ linuxwolf, why not just file a bug with the relevant clients?
16:27:27 MattJ Say "it would be really nice if you included the version and platform in your caps url"
16:27:38 linuxwolf well, it's hard to file a bug if there's not defined (recommended) format
16:27:49 Kev I don't think I have any particular objections to this, I'd have to sit down with 115 and the new spec and be sure there's no unfortunate interactions.
16:27:54 linuxwolf and I likely would…it would be nice for us to agree to a general format
16:27:57 Kev So...bring on the spec :)
16:28:09 linuxwolf well…so with the 115 problems
16:28:12 MattJ I don't see why we need to define such a format, it's not for interop and I don't think anyone is going to enforce it
16:28:24 linuxwolf do we want a separate spec, or an implementation detail within 115 (as we fix 115)
16:28:25 Kev MattJ: You can say the same about iq:version :)
16:28:35 linuxwolf MattJ: It actually is for interop
16:28:40 MattJ Kev, I bet someone, somewhere, has used iq:version for interop
16:28:50 Kev linuxwolf: I *think* a sidenote in 115, but I don't feel strongly.
16:28:52 linuxwolf iq:version needs to DIAG (-:
16:29:00 linuxwolf I can go either way
16:29:06 linuxwolf fixing 115 is not a small task
16:29:10 Kev I don't think I know DIAG. What's 'G'?
16:29:14 linuxwolf gah
16:29:18 Kev Ah.
16:29:18 linuxwolf DIAF
16:29:24 linuxwolf Gulag?
16:29:24 Kev No, I like DIA Gah
16:29:35 linuxwolf lol...literally
16:29:35 linuxwolf ok
16:29:42 Kev Anyway, I think we're vaguely done with this are we?
16:29:43 fritzy there you go
16:29:50 linuxwolf so, I (or some minion) can writeup a tiny XEP about it
16:30:16 Kev linuxwolf: Sure.
16:30:25 linuxwolf I don't know if I want to tackle fixing hashes at the same time we add this note
16:30:25 MattJ Sounds like a plan
16:30:41 stpeter ah, to have minions
16:30:49 fritzy that'd be nice
16:31:01 Kev So
16:31:01 linuxwolf technically, my minions are loaned to me
16:31:03 Kev !agendaup 0
16:31:03 Kanchil+ Kev: 7) Any other business
16:31:06 linuxwolf /fini
16:31:22 fritzy !done
16:31:33 fritzy or wait, is that not-done?
16:31:41 Kev !agendaup
16:31:41 Kanchil+ Kev: 8) Fini.
16:31:44 Kev Thanks all :)
16:31:47 Kev bangs the gavel
16:31:50 linuxwolf adios
16:31:56 Kev !agendaup -8
16:31:56 Kanchil+ Kev: 0) Fini.
16:31:58 MattJ Wow, on the dot
16:32:02 Kev !agendaclear
16:32:02 Kanchil+ Kev: Done.
16:32:12 linuxwolf goes off to read a dictionary, hopefully soaking in better spelling mojo
16:33:03 stpeter returns to his review of OAuth spe s
16:33:06 stpeter specs even
16:33:23 linuxwolf feels less horrible now…thanks stpeter (-:
16:33:46 stpeter :P
16:33:57 linuxwolf has left
16:34:33 fritzy cio
16:34:35 fritzy has left
16:34:48 stpeter who is the cio?
16:35:42 bear that's an italian typo - he meant ciao
16:36:37 stpeter I figured :)
16:37:16 stpeter although my Czech friends spell it "čau" :)
16:47:28 Neustradamus has joined
16:47:31 Tobias has left
16:48:31 remko has left
16:55:42 Steffen Larsen has left
17:20:12 Steffen Larsen has joined
17:35:44 Tobias has joined
17:37:59 Steffen Larsen has left
17:41:26 Kev has left
17:42:03 Kev has joined
19:03:08 bear has left
19:03:09 bear has joined
19:37:31 Tobias has left
19:43:13 Florob has left
19:43:49 Florob has joined
20:01:01 Tobias has joined
20:10:30 Tobias has left
20:11:33 Tobias has joined
21:07:59 Tobias has left
21:58:19 stpeter has left
22:11:49 ralphm has joined
22:13:58 ralphm has left
22:33:04 Tobias has joined
22:56:14 mlundblad has joined
23:22:10 Neustradamus has left
23:45:49 Tobias has left