XMPP Council - 2011-11-23

00:54:07 linuxwolf has left
00:54:09 linuxwolf has joined
01:02:36 linuxwolf has left
01:13:38 linuxwolf has joined
01:50:26 linuxwolf has left
02:17:42 linuxwolf has joined
03:05:04 linuxwolf has left
03:12:43 linuxwolf has joined
03:50:16 linuxwolf has left
08:34:46 Tobias has joined
08:50:43 Tobias has left
08:53:14 Tobias has joined
09:23:10 Tobias has left
09:40:40 Tobias has joined
09:49:27 Tobias has left
09:49:56 Tobias has joined
10:18:27 Tobias has left
10:46:58 Tobias has joined
13:23:38 ralphm has left
13:58:20 Tobias has left
15:16:53 Zash has joined
16:02:51 linuxwolf has joined
16:07:10 ralphm has joined
16:21:35 Zash has joined
16:23:37 stpeter has joined
16:38:26 linuxwolf has left
16:38:32 linuxwolf has joined
16:42:09 Tobias has joined
16:47:31 MattJ has joined
16:48:25 MattJ The IETF is like one long roadshow
16:48:48 ralphm Heh
16:48:53 MattJ When they perform in London I'm going to buy tickets
16:49:10 ralphm Do they have T-shirts with all venues and their dates, yet?
16:49:41 stpeter ralphm: for those who've attended all the meetings, yes
16:49:44 MattJ They wouldn't have t-shirts large enough
16:50:12 stpeter MattJ: has a meeting in London been announced?
16:50:36 MattJ stpeter, not that I'm aware of
16:51:21 stpeter http://www.ietf.org/meeting/upcoming.html
16:51:24 stpeter nope
16:55:21 waqas has joined
17:01:56 Kev Righty.
17:02:03 Kev Shall we have a meeting then? :)
17:02:11 Tobias yup
17:02:15 Kev 1) Roll call
17:02:17 Kev I'm here.
17:02:22 linuxwolf Jeebus
17:02:25 linuxwolf her
17:02:27 linuxwolf here even
17:02:31 MattJ Hair
17:02:33 MattJ *Here
17:02:52 Kev ralphm: ?
17:02:57 stpeter notes that linuxwolf is supposed to be on vacation right now
17:03:07 Kev Bad linuxwolf, bad.
17:03:18 linuxwolf notes that XSF doesn't feel quite like work work
17:03:39 MattJ !
17:03:42 linuxwolf kids decided to start pestering me just as Kev bangs the start gavel
17:03:45 Kev pokes Ralph.
17:04:21 ralphm here
17:04:25 Kev Excellent.
17:04:28 Kev 2) Selection of a new Chair.
17:04:29 MattJ ETOOMANYMEETINGS
17:04:40 Kev I'm happy to do this again, or happy for someone else to.
17:04:48 Kev Anyone fancy cat herding?
17:04:54 MattJ I'm happy for you to if you're happy to
17:05:06 linuxwolf ditto
17:05:14 Tobias same here
17:05:29 stpeter another year of the Kev dictatorship?!? ;-)
17:05:33 MattJ For the record if I was chair, the 30 minute meeting rule would be on the block
17:05:40 MattJ So it's best Kev stays
17:05:44 linuxwolf heh
17:05:48 Kev stpeter: Benevolent.
17:05:53 stpeter Kev: natch :)
17:05:58 linuxwolf mostly benevolent (-;
17:06:08 Kev linuxwolf: Benevolent when it's in my interests.
17:06:13 linuxwolf heh
17:06:39 ralphm +1 for kev
17:06:48 ralphm also, I am experiencing a lot of lag
17:06:49 Kev rubs his hands with evil glee
17:06:54 stpeter heehee
17:07:00 linuxwolf can I change my vote? (-;
17:07:10 Kev ralphm: That's ok, you've done the important bit now, you can vote for everything else on-list :D
17:07:20 ralphm hehe
17:07:22 Kev Right.
17:07:29 Kev 3) XEP-0068 Accept new version?
17:07:51 Kev This was the x- stuff in http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0068-1.2.html, as I recall
17:07:57 stpeter yes
17:08:24 stpeter do you guys need the diff again? I posted it to the council@ list a while back
17:08:31 Kev I don't, thanks.
17:09:06 MattJ I do :)
17:09:08 MattJ Looking for it
17:09:10 Kev So, I was reading this earlier, and while I'm not opposed to dropping x-, especially if those smart IETF guys want us to, I'd like some more guidance in -68 about what to do instead, I think, to avoid conflicts.
17:09:12 MattJ and... where's HAL, hmm
17:09:19 stpeter http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0068/diff/1.1/vs/1.2pre1
17:09:25 MattJ HAL says this one: http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0068/diff/1.1/vs/1.2pre1
17:09:30 MattJ Oh, you're faster than he is :)
17:09:53 MattJ Ah yes, memory jogged
17:10:26 Kev stpeter: I was wondering about maybe something like suggesting people use project-specific (or similar) names.
17:10:36 Kev So as to reduce the chance of conflicts.
17:10:52 linuxwolf at one point, I thought we'd suggested using Clark-notation with your own namespace
17:10:58 Kev Or is that, too, in opposition to the X-Dash
17:11:04 linuxwolf e.g. {http://example.com/protocol/foo}myfield
17:11:11 stpeter there are some recommendations in the xdash I-D
17:11:19 Kev stpeter: Right, but not in -68.
17:11:24 stpeter http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash
17:11:43 stpeter sure, I'd be fine with adding those to -68 as well
17:11:47 stpeter there's not big hurry
17:12:00 Kev I wonder if updating to match xdash is premature, too.
17:12:13 stpeter I just don't to publish an RFC about how x- is bad while -68 says the opposite :)
17:12:23 Kev stpeter: Duplication isn't strictly necessary, but some sort of onward pointer seems to be.
17:12:35 Kev (Beyond the proposed "Don't use x- because xdash says not to)
17:12:45 stpeter Kev: we could certainly wait at least until after the WGLC in the APPSAWG @ IETF
17:12:58 MattJ "SHOULD identify a convention to allow local or implementation-specific extensions, and reserve delimeters for such uses as needed."
17:13:01 Kev Excellent. My first vote of term is a -1. I feel good.
17:13:02 ralphm what linuxwolf said
17:13:05 ralphm alternatively, we have existing 'scoping' with pubsub# and muc#
17:13:18 ralphm damn lag
17:13:23 linuxwolf (-:
17:13:46 MattJ Ok, idea... a note in -0068 about xdash potentially being the future?
17:13:49 Kev So, agreement to hold off until a) WGLC and b) some suggestions for alternatives in a new 1.2?
17:14:02 linuxwolf Kev: +1
17:14:08 Kev I'm happy with a note saying "xdash looks like the future" right now, if people would rather that, yes.
17:14:12 linuxwolf (to your suggestions)
17:14:12 MattJ That way we acknowledge the xdash movement, without committing to it
17:14:22 stpeter WFM
17:14:31 Tobias Kev, sounds reasonable..so yes
17:14:39 MattJ We need a "council note" element in XEPML :)
17:14:47 stpeter heh
17:14:48 Kev MattJ: I've suggested that before, I think.
17:14:52 linuxwolf that's not a bad idea, actually
17:14:53 MattJ I think you have
17:15:06 stpeter notes that some RFCs contain "IESG Note" sections
17:15:06 Kev (I say "I think", but what I really mean is "I'm very sure I have")
17:15:27 linuxwolf that sounds like an AOB item to me (-:
17:15:29 Kev Golly, time is getting on.
17:15:32 MattJ Heh
17:15:32 bear has joined
17:15:35 Kev So, I think we've discussed this to death.
17:15:47 Kev 4) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dmuc3.html Accept as Experimental
17:15:58 linuxwolf ah, less controversial items
17:16:04 MattJ Heh
17:16:04 Kev linuxwolf: Possibly :)
17:16:05 linuxwolf </sarcasm>
17:17:05 Kev So, my reading of this was (a few weeks ago) that it's a fourth DMUC spec, using pretty much the approach of the third (FMUC) with some uglies.
17:17:34 Kev And that, given FMUC's mine, I'll pretty much defer to the rest of Council on whether to accept or not.
17:17:41 MattJ Would you highlight the uglies (in an email if many)?
17:17:53 MattJ I think I'll vote on list after reviewing both specs
17:17:56 Kev That'd mean me re-reading. Let me scan now, I've not re-read this week.
17:17:59 linuxwolf can you provide me a link to fmuc?
17:18:25 MattJ The scary thing is that none of these XEPs are the way I would do it :P
17:18:41 Kev http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0289.html
17:18:44 linuxwolf MattJ: the best thing about standards is there's so many of them
17:19:00 ralphm MattJ: submit a dmuc4 (we started at 0?)
17:19:01 linuxwolf grazie
17:19:11 MattJ There are two, mine, and everyone else's
17:19:12 Kev MattJ: You may be solving a different problem - I think the drive for DMUC/FMUC at the moment is largely for slightly specialist deployments.
17:19:18 linuxwolf oh, FMUC expires next week
17:19:46 Kev Anyway, dmuc3 does things like sending rosters in a new namespace, instead of re-using the current MUC notation, or the iq:roster notation.
17:19:51 Tobias i'd also be nice if new XEP on this topic would have a short section on comparison against the already existing approaches of nearly the same thing
17:20:02 MattJ Kev, indeed, most of these are designed around different (but similar) requirements
17:20:03 Kev It does message forwarding not using the message forwarding spec.
17:20:23 MattJ By dropping some requirements you can vastly increase simplicity, which is where the divide comes from I think
17:20:32 linuxwolf Kev: I think that's because this may be documenting existing work … prior to your msg-fwd work
17:20:55 stpeter has been thinking about distributed chat again recently but hasn't had time to update his DMUC spec
17:20:56 Kev linuxwolf: Oh. That wasn't my understanding, I hadn't realised that.
17:21:05 ralphm linuxwolfnod
17:21:21 Kev ralphm / linuxwolf: Do you know how long Trident have had this working for?
17:21:26 linuxwolf I may be misinformed also
17:21:52 Kev Anyway, this is looking like it's moving to a discussion on list, doesn't it.
17:22:04 Kev So we've got two AOB items.
17:22:08 Kev 5) Date of next meeting.
17:22:11 linuxwolf it does … although ...
17:22:12 Kev Does this time next week work for everyone?
17:22:19 linuxwolf gah, slow down there TEx
17:22:19 stpeter WFM
17:22:22 Tobias WFM
17:22:23 stpeter heh
17:22:27 Kev linuxwolf: Only 9minutes left!
17:22:30 linuxwolf -1 to next week
17:22:30 MattJ wfm
17:22:31 ralphm Kev I don't know, the document reads like an existing thing
17:22:33 linuxwolf I'm in China
17:22:50 linuxwolf again
17:22:51 Kev Everyone ok for the same time in a fortnight?
17:22:53 MattJ linuxwolf, council meetings too democratic to join from China?
17:23:12 MattJ wfm
17:23:13 linuxwolf I think I can make it in two weeks … I'd have to compare the times
17:23:24 linuxwolf are we still looking at 1700 UTC?
17:23:26 ralphm I can do next week. I am in San Francisco from 6-15 dec
17:23:34 stpeter poor linuxwolf will be flying across the big lake again soon
17:23:41 linuxwolf /sigh
17:23:54 Tobias in two weeks works for me too
17:23:59 linuxwolf and I won't have any status until the way back
17:24:13 Kev Will we have anything to discuss next week to make it worth having a meeting with linuxwolf voting onlist?
17:24:19 Kev Or shall we do the week after and have Ralph vote onlist?
17:24:29 stpeter IMHO, week after
17:24:29 Kev (Or leave it until we have something to discuss)
17:24:39 linuxwolf I'm pretty sure that I'll be in the air for next week
17:25:02 linuxwolf my trip is 11/29 to 12/09
17:25:10 Kev By the time Ralph's back you're looking at 21st Dec, which is pretty close to the Christmas break.
17:25:15 ralphm Kev: sure. I might be able to attend, but it'll be my first full day at Mochi, so probably no.
17:25:17 stpeter will get busy on XEPs again now that he has completed his penultimate IETF meeting with IESG responsibilities
17:25:33 Kev Ok, so, I propose we leave it until we have something to discuss, and then have a meeting with 4 members and one onlist, whenever that is.
17:25:39 MattJ stpeter, congratulations :)
17:25:43 linuxwolf sounds good to me
17:25:45 MattJ Kev, +1
17:25:59 linuxwolf ping?
17:26:05 Kev pong?
17:26:16 linuxwolf wow … burst of lag
17:26:21 Tobias Kev, +1
17:26:27 Kev Ok, then.
17:26:36 Kev (I'm assuming Ralph isn't opposed to not having meetings he can't make)
17:27:01 stpeter heh
17:27:01 Kev 6) Any other business
17:27:13 Kev Council note in XEPs and GSoC from Peter.
17:27:14 MattJ Yes, I haven't congratulated Tobias yet :)
17:27:23 linuxwolf I think 1700 UTC is 0100 CST
17:27:24 ralphm I am not opposed to that
17:27:27 Tobias isn't GSoC something for the board?
17:27:37 Kev Tobias: Council typically is heavily involved.
17:27:49 Kev By which we really mean Kevin is typically heavily involved, and he's on Council :)
17:27:55 ralphm haha
17:27:57 Tobias Kev, ahh..okay... -)
17:27:57 linuxwolf heh
17:28:10 Kev But Council are part of voting on projects.
17:28:12 stpeter will have time to help with GSoC in 2012
17:28:16 Kev stpeter: What did you want to discuss?
17:28:35 linuxwolf stpeter: 4 more months? (-:
17:28:41 ralphm linuxwolfisn't that perfect timing for when you get back from karaoke?
17:28:45 stpeter Kev: I had a tickler item on my calendar from months and months ago for us to get coordinated about GSoC earlier in the cycle this time
17:28:54 linuxwolf ralphm: heh, we'll have to see
17:29:01 stpeter Kev: we can discuss at a future meeting
17:29:11 linuxwolf consider us tickled?
17:29:14 stpeter yep
17:29:25 Kev I was intending to tickle when Google announced GSoC '12 (assuming they do)
17:29:28 stpeter I'll bring it up again at the next meeting
17:29:39 Kev So, the other thing was Council notes in XEPs.
17:29:45 linuxwolf +1 from me
17:29:46 stpeter Kev: I think we decided we wanted to think about it earlier
17:29:51 ralphm For the record, we have a FOSDEM devroom
17:29:56 linuxwolf yay
17:29:58 Kev Is there anything for us to discuss? Does someone want to volunteer to update the stylesheet?
17:30:06 ralphm and will be talking about it in 1.5h
17:30:17 Kev ralphm: Yes, that's great thanks. Sorry I can't make that meeting.
17:30:20 linuxwolf I can take a look at it, but no firm commit from me yet
17:30:27 Tobias and the XSL for the PDF publishing part... :)
17:30:32 Kev Lovely, action item for linuxwolf.
17:30:36 Kev And for Tobias.
17:30:46 Kev Anything else?
17:30:49 stpeter Kev: that can be the first section of the document, doesn't need a special XML element, I think
17:30:54 ralphm or is it 20:00 UTC?
17:30:58 Kev stpeter: WFM.
17:31:03 MattJ 20:00
17:31:10 linuxwolf yeah, right when I have a doc appt
17:31:13 ralphm my train is pulling into the station
17:31:17 ralphm bang!
17:31:18 Kev Ok, I think we're done.
17:31:20 linuxwolf talking about me becoming a cyborg
17:31:21 Kev Thanks all :)
17:31:42 Kev does the first gavel banging of the new term.
17:31:50 Kev I'll send out minutes as per usual, delayed as per usual :)
17:31:52 ralphm yay
17:31:53 stpeter woot!
17:31:55 linuxwolf /nod
17:32:00 stpeter thanks, guys
17:32:13 Kev Speaking of that, are the room logs working again?
17:32:21 Kev No.
17:32:21 MattJ They were broken?
17:32:24 linuxwolf I think any meeting over the next two weeks will be difficult for me … so we'll see
17:32:28 Kev Have been since the upgrade, yes.
17:32:35 linuxwolf ugh
17:32:37 stpeter wanders off to do some PTO things during his paid time off, but will be back in time for the FOSDEM chat
17:32:42 Tobias k...see you guys later or so...heading home now
17:32:45 MattJ I'll take a look at that too then
17:32:49 Kev Thanks Tobias.
17:32:52 Kev Thanks MattJ.
17:32:54 stpeter I hadn't realized the logs were gone
17:33:27 Kev HTTP 500.
17:33:32 linuxwolf eek
17:34:11 Kev I only care because that's what I use for pulling the minutes off.
17:34:25 Kev I should really try out this live minute taking thing Board do.
17:38:50 Tobias has joined
18:37:27 Tobias has joined
18:45:02 linuxwolf has left
20:06:16 ralphm has left
20:24:39 waqas has left
20:37:03 stpeter has left
21:25:53 Tobias has left
21:35:54 Tobias has joined
22:08:03 linuxwolf has joined
22:36:02 linuxwolf has left
23:08:52 Tobias has left