XMPP Council - 2012-01-10

Council in 56 minutes, by my count.

yup

Kev, do you plan more error info tags like <server-unavailable/> in psa?

or are those supposed to be the standard ones from the RFC?

Those are the only two I'd anticipated. They're not explicitly mappet other ones.

posted a microblog about the meeting

So I see :)

:)

I'll ping linuxwolf IRL

Matthew appears to be online

Ralph is auto-away

BTW http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/ is out of date :)

brb

So it is.

Tobias: Please provide some text for your blurb.

for my what?

blurb |blərb| noun a short description of a book, movie, or other product written for promotional purposes and appearing on the cover of a book or in an advertisement.

ahh..okay

Matthew said he's joining

pinged Ralph as well

I'd already pinged both.

:)

in stereo!

btw, when's the next board meeting?

Have I really been Chair for four terms now?

I'm surprised it's that long without someone kicking me out.

Quite possibly

Kev: I think so :)

*gasp*

MattJ: should be tomorrow at 16:30 UTC, I pinged the board list about that earlier today

Right.

I've updated http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/ slightly.

Please all check your blurbs and send in as appropriate.

Or edit yourself if you have the powers.

Onto the meeting:

1) Roll call

I'm here.

thanks, Kev

presente

MattJ / Tobias?

Present

there

2) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/network.html Accept as XEP?

+1

+1

I read this, and I have only one significant complaint with it - I don't see why it requires the aggregator to be a server, it seems a task that could very well be performed by a bot or component.

+1

It's a good point

Tobias: Was that +1 to my comment, or to publishing?

publishing on network xep

Kev: true

I don't think it's a big enough point to block publication on, mind, but I think I'd rather see it addressed at some point.

I'm happy to publish.

Hello

3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/psa.html Accept as XEP?

Hi Ralph.

+1 on 2)

Thanks.

+0 on 1) :)

Kev: fwif, I don't see the difference between a server and a component, from the protocol point of view

heh

Ralph Meijer: There isn't one, to the outside world.

and are the initials purely coincidental? :)

MattJ: I don't think so. Certainly not materially.

No, it was a backronym. Someone at Isode has a 'great' sense of humour.

gee, I wonder who

No idea

I'm going to lose sleep over this one

also, good use of 'quotes'

I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to guess which Chair of the Board that is.

heh

MattJ: really?

Ralph Meijer, no :P

So, +1

anyhow…I've no objections to accepting as a XEP, provided "urn:xmpp:psa" is changed to "urn:xmpp:psa:0"

+1, and what lw says

I realised that when writing MFR, and then forgot to go back and change it, thanks.

which is very minor, and probably something the XEP editor catches (-:

Tobias:?

yup...+1 from me on psa

4) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/fastmuc.html Accept as XEP?

looks sensible the way it is

this one needs consistency work

Where, and before or after publication?

this time, I would prefer before publication

Typo in ns

at least, pick a namespace (-:

s/pick a namespace/pick one namespace/

Oh, just a namespace typo?

there are areas I think are vague, but I think can be addressed after publication

so that is a −1 for consistency?

I didn't get a chance to send a comment about that before now, and am willing to wait until publication

and the "I've just stopped writing"

I think I'm +0 on this, until it's more fleshed out

I don't immediately see the namespace typo - can you point it out, please?

pressence

is it "urn:xmpp:mfr" or "urn:xmpp:presence-session:0"?

or urn:xmpp:pressence-session:0"

Oh.

mfr is the disco feature, rather than the namespace.

is there a good reason to define a separate disco feature from the namespace?

There was a reason, but maybe it's not a good one.

I'm not immediately seeing it from this draft

Someone could decide to use the same protocol for restablishing presence in other situations - such as after a client reconnect.

But no, probably not.

in theory, we could have other protocols that act in a similar manner to MUC, but then shouldn't we make this more generic sooner rather than later?

Fixed in Git, everything's now urn:xmpp:presence-session:0

and "MFR" is an application of the more-generic

grazie

I think it's generic at the moment.

I'm +1 on publishing

That is - the protocol is generic at the moment, but the described use case isn't.

/nod

I didn't want to open the rabbit hole of trying to do fast client reconnect with presence restablishment right now, but wrote the protocol such that we could in the future.

it does need fleshing out … but I'll not object to publishing on that account

In which case, I think we'd extract the normative bits into another XEP, and reference that. It wouldn't affect implementations.

ok

WFM

So, I *think* that's no objection from M/M/R. Tobias?

It's no objection, but I'm not too keen on it being published in such a poor editorial state

yeah...it looks highly unfinished

Block it if you think it should be blocked.

I have every confidence it will be remedied though, so...

Fine, -1 from me :)

-1 from me too

I'm sure it'll look better next week

(-:

I'll just remember it next time someone submits a protoXEP :)

Naturally :)

heh

I'll just set up my own standards foundation

Very sensible.

indubitably

as long as I can borrow this one's board chair

5) DMUC3

/sigh

I believe the intent is clear, and yes it needs cleanup, but no I don't think that should hold it up

linuxwolf: What did you think we should discuss about this?

that's what 'experimental' is for, imo

All I can say about DMUC3 is that I want to see a discussion on it

well, I wasn't sure if anyone would respond before this meeting, so now I'm not so sure (-:

hopefully this kicks off said discussion of DMUCn vs FMUC vs ....

(Yes, I'd got it to the stage where I thought it fitted "not obviously wrong", so I submitted it, I can do further work and re-submit)

Ralph Meijer, we've collectively blocked XEPs on editorial issues before now

MattJ: right. The mail went to the standards list, I don't see much happening there yet. (on DMUC)

MattJ: I know, but 'we' have different views than 'I'.

linuxwolf: So there's nothing you want to discuss here?

(i.e. it wasn't really for the agenda)

if we want to resolve this, I think someone needs to be more proactive on collaboration (-:

and by someone, I mean "preferably not me"

(-:

MattJ: If you care to lookup my acceptance history, you will see that I usually lean towards 'accept'.

I drafted an email to the list re. collaboration in the XSF, but considered it might be deemed too patronising

linuxwolf: I have on my list for the next week or so to make sure that someone (either me or someone else I can fob it off on in the office) updates FMUC to cover Wayne's points.

MattJ: As I think that is a good starting point for discussion.

Ralph Meijer, same here, but I don't think it's going to hurt this one waiting another week :)

MattJ: The dmuc stuff is an exception because of the overlap.

Kev: cool

So, what goes in the minutes for DMUC3. I think we essentially decided not to discuss it.

"Kevin Smith to follow up with FMUC updates"

6) Date of next meeting.

NBTBNC WFM

Next Tue I'm having my 'net connection faffed with, so I may well be offline.

Kev: yeah, I don't see this as a discussable thing now.

actually, this timeslot doesn't work nicely for me

hrm

i'm quite flexible when it comes to a timeslot next week

Is anyone not able to do the old timeslot next week?

Wednesday, 1600GMT.

I loved the old one

:)

old and new both work for me

Ralph Meijer: the old one is oft inconvenient to me, but not unattainable (-:

ah

linuxwolf: Is it doable next week?

I work a lot evenings these days :-)

that said, 2012-01-18T16:00Z is acceptable (-:

If we decide on next week now, we can discuss a general time onlist.

MattJ / Tobias: ?

ok

wfm

16:00Z is 09:00-07:00, which is about 30 minutes before I get sucked into meetings

yeha..let's discuss general time on list

but 2012-01-18T16:00Z should work on the first look

shall I request XEP-0077 2.4rc1 for next week?

(no hurry on it)

I dunno … we're tentatively scheduled for XEP-0045 (-:

right

stpeter: Right, sorry, we ran out of time :)

Kev: no worries

We're over 30minutes now!

Noooooo!

yep

7) Any other business.

None here

nay

Ok, thanks.

All done then.

Thanks

thx

We don't have room logs back yet, right MattJ?

Correct

A deadline I was working towards passed yesterday, I'm hoping to start catching up with normal things now

did the deadline make a «swoosh» when it passed by? ;-)

was the deadline a train (swoosh) or a bullet (zing)? (-:

Amazingly I'd everything ready 10 minutes early :)

Kev: thanks for the quick minutes

hehe, that reminds me of Zaagmans: http://www.dwotd.nl/2009/11/675-zagen.html

(at 'Extra')

stpeter: I wrote them as we met, for a change.

good thinking :)

brb

Remember everyone, we need new blurbs for the Council page on xmpp.org.

"Matt has been involved with the Jabber community since late 2000, has been a member of the XSF since its inception in 2001, and has previously served on the 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, and 2010-2011 Councils. Matt is a senior engineer and architect of XMPP client libraries for Cisco, Inc. and was previously a Professional Services Engineer and client developer for Jabber, Inc."

Updated, merci.

de rien

the next Council meeting is 7 days from today, or 8 days from today?

8? … 2011-01-18T16:00:00Z

right

just verifying

I might as well update the calendar while I'm doing XEP stuff

apparently I can only deal with absolutes

(-:

grazie

linuxwolf: sure thing!

linuxwolf: I notice that I never processed your patch about the council note, I'm happy to do that now, too

oh, really?

it arrived not long before the winter holidays

well, since there was no objections, that would be great

yepper

I already lost my local copy of it

heh

Sorry, I vaguely recall seeing that and put off processing it for some reason.

Inbox zero has 168 threads in it at the moment (for my personal account).

well, it was delivered rather close to the holidays

I should take a day of holiday to sort out my inbox. Problem being that if I have a day of holiday, sorting my inbox is one of the last things I'd want to do with it.

(-:

Heh. Did you just publish MUC Fast Reconnect Peter? :)

I thought MattJ and Tobias were −1 to publishing MFR?

oh

sigh

HA! Proof that stpeter is a human being!

(-:

Nevermind. I'll sort it out tomorrow, I expect.

linuxwolf: I don't see why that follows.

oh we've got plenty of evidence of that :P

I make plenty of mistakes

mostly because he's treated as infallible around the office (-:

at least by some

they're wrong!

inevitably

I think I might leave the office early today so I can prep for my conference call at 17:00...

Go home get rest.

your boss is out-of-town … play hooky!

heh

linuxwolf: I can invite you to join this IRI design team call at 5 if you'd like :)

uh no.

Wait, let me think- no

your term is up at the end of March, right?

yepper

yeah

I optimized my personal website for mobile recently

good for you

desktop versions are too cluttered

by far

of course, I busted all my feeds when I did that ;-)

and the mobile versions are just as capable

heh

interesting

Guess which XMPP server they're planning on using

jabberd1

that's great

really?

Yeah

I was watching one of their talks

sigh

nothing like being on the cutting edge

and he said they were planning on using "pro-soh-dee"

(-:

It was the first time I'd heard it pronounced *that* way

It took me a rewind and a minute to be sure I hadn't misheard

vs. pro-zoh-dee?

prah-zah-dee?

pro-zah-dee?

I never knew there were so many ways to say it

(-:

or spell it, for that matter

pråsådyh

you'll have to add an official pronunciation MP3 to prosody.im (_:

Wasn't there one already?

There is

gah

really?

Really :)

No

matthew-wild-says-prosody.ogg

Ha

not mp3 ;)

there's no link on the mainpage, or the FAQ

It's not an FAQ :P

People just assume they're right

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

and to be honest, I don't really care how people say it...

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

"How do you pronounce 'prosody'?"

NO!

Haha

(-:

now there's a meme we can start at the XMPP Summits!

"How do you pronounce <insert-project-name>?"

“pro” “zo” “dee”

well, it comes from Greek προσῳδία and σ in Greek is "ess"

The what

linuxwolf: *approval*

Therefore I bow to stpeter's pronunciation of Prosody

I just like an excuse to use Greek letters :)

:D

+1 Zash

"Ralph Meijer is the lead developer of several Jabber-related projects and services, including Wokkel <http://wokkel.ik.nu/> and the XMPP support in Twisted <http://www.twistedmatrix.com/>, the Idavoll <http://idavoll.ik.nu/> pubsub component, and Planet Jabber <http://planet.jabber.org/>. Ralph <http://ralphm.net/> has been member of the XMPP Council since 2004 and is a platform engineer for Mochi Media <http://www.mochimedia.com/>."

Also "zimpy" is my favorite.

Updated, ta.

Kev: there should be a space in front of 'Wokkel'

"Tobias Markmann is an occaisonal contributer to various XMPP projects including <a href="http://prosody.im/>Prosody</a> and <a href="http://swift.im/">Swift</a>. He has also initiated the <a href="http://code.google.com/p/xmppench/">xmppench</a> project, a XMPP server benchmark tool. Tobias joined the XMPP Council late 2011.<br/> His blog can be found at <a href="http://ayena.de/">ayena.de</a>."

Kev, how is this for starters? ^^

occasional

contributor

ouch

aside from tons of typos..i shouldn't write such things that late

thx

hehe

(-: