XMPP Council - 2012-01-25

  1. stpeter has joined

  2. Tobias has left

  3. stpeter has left

  4. linuxwolf has joined

  5. linuxwolf has left

  6. linuxwolf has joined

  7. linuxwolf has left

  8. Kev has joined

  9. Tobias has joined

  10. Tobias has left

  11. linuxwolf has joined

  12. stpeter has joined

  13. Tobias has joined

  14. stpeter sends a five minute warning via identi.ca

  15. Kev


  16. Kev

    I got caught up, forgot to send a mail to the list.

  17. stpeter nods

  18. ralphm has joined

  19. Zash has joined

  20. ralphm

    Hello Fans!

  21. Kev


  22. Kev

    1minute to ...

  23. Kev

    No minutes to go.

  24. Kev

    I don't see a MattJ here or in my roster.

  25. Tobias


  26. Kev


  27. Kev

    1) Roll call

  28. Kev

    IIIIIII'm here.

  29. linuxwolf


  30. ralphm too, for a change

  31. linuxwolf gasps

  32. stpeter


  33. stpeter apologizes to linuxwolf

  34. linuxwolf


  35. stpeter

    for PM pokage when you were already here :)

  36. Kev

    2) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pubsub-uri.html Accept as Experimental?

  37. linuxwolf


  38. Kev

    I'm -1 on this on the basis that Board have recommended we talk to IETF folks first.

  39. ralphm

    Kev: that

  40. ralphm

    Kev: also, I wonder if this couldn't be done within the current xmpp schema

  41. Kev

    ralphm: Possibly, although not easily, perhaps.

  42. ralphm

    Kev: wait what?

  43. ralphm

    Kev: xmpp:pubsub.ik.nu?;node=test;id=itemid

  44. Kev

    I said only perhaps.

  45. Kev

    I'm aware there are simple cases for which it's blindingly obvious how to do it :)

  46. Zash

    Doesn't the proposed format conflict with full jids?

  47. ralphm

    oh, it's 'item', not 'id'

  48. stpeter

    I tend to agree with Ralph -- we have a way to do this using the existing scheme

  49. linuxwolf

    and I'm loathe to add to the scheme registry

  50. ralphm

    XEP-0060 examples 225-228

  51. Kev

    Zash: I don't remember, I read it yesterday, I've forgotten it by now.

  52. Zash


  53. Kev

    Oh, yes, I remember being unclear whether it'd end up with legal URIs or not.

  54. Kev

    Anyway, -1 for now.

  55. Kev

    Moooving on.

  56. Kev

    3) http://doomsong.co.uk/extensions/render/xep-0311.html Accept as Experimental?

  57. Kev

    I updated the not-quite-a-XEP-0311 so it doesn't now say "and here I stopped writing".

  58. Kev

    I think it's now ok to push.

  59. stpeter

    oh yes, the one I screwed up by publishing

  60. linuxwolf

    I've no objections to publishing as now-actually-311

  61. ralphm


  62. Tobias

    +1 on that too

  63. Kev

    Cool. My empire expands.

  64. stpeter


  65. Kev

    4) http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0077-2.4.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0077/diff/2.3/vs/2.4rc1

  66. Kev

    This just adds a disco identity, I think, which I'm fine with.

  67. ralphm

    Kev: maybe you can occupy Brussels and make it a fun place :-P

  68. linuxwolf


  69. Kev

    It doesn't address questions of what advertising that entity *means*.

  70. linuxwolf

    +1 on −0077#2.4

  71. Tobias

    yeah..+1 on that change too.. a lot services do it that way anyway already

  72. Kev

    (i.e. M-Link would advertise it because it allows password changing, but it doesn't allow open registration)

  73. Kev

    (In fact, I think M-Link *does* advertise, although I might misremember)

  74. linuxwolf

    a lot do advertise

  75. stpeter

    Kev: right, if you support that protocol in any way, you can advertise the feature

  76. Kev

    I think for Peter's use case, which is finding if it supports registration, the stream feature is the way to go, FWIW.

  77. Kev

    ralphm: Everywhere I go is a fun place.

  78. Kev

    Almost by definition. Just not necessarily for me :)

  79. Kev

    Anyway, who're we missing? Ralph, I think we need your +-[01] still.

  80. ralphm

    Whereas for things other than IM servers, it means different every time. I'd say it just advertises understanding the protocol, nothing more.

  81. ralphm


  82. stpeter

    well, the server directory use case has other means of figuring out whether another server supports IBR, but I still think we need a way to discover jabber:iq:register support in any case

  83. linuxwolf


  84. Kev

    stpeter: Yes, although mostly for password changing, I think.

  85. Kev

    Ok, all +1 on 77.

  86. Kev

    5) http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0114-1.6.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0114/diff/1.5/vs/1.6rc1

  87. linuxwolf

    I'd rather do a new protocol than try to fix more of −0077 for those "what does support mean"

  88. linuxwolf


  89. stpeter

    linuxwolf: true indeed

  90. ralphm

    my comment was mostly about things like MUC and pubsub services and gateways that also support this namespace

  91. Kev hands linuxwolf a tinopener and a can labeled "not worms, honest guv".

  92. Kev

    ralphm: Understood.

  93. linuxwolf

    ralphm: right … which is kind of my point

  94. linuxwolf

    and which I now realize I shouldn't have said anything (-:

  95. Kev

    I'm +1 on (5)

  96. ralphm

    I think disco rarely explains exactly what a 'feature' means. It just says 'I support this protocol'

  97. linuxwolf

    sleeping dogs left to lie

  98. linuxwolf


  99. linuxwolf

    +1 on −0114#1.6

  100. Kev pokes MattJ

  101. ralphm

    +1 on 0114

  102. Zash pokes MattJ

  103. Kev

    Tobias: ?

  104. Tobias


  105. Kev

    6) Date of next meeting.

  106. MattJ has joined

  107. Kev

    (now) usual slot?

  108. Tobias

    hi MattJ

  109. MattJ

    Gaah, sorry, time confusal :/

  110. stpeter


  111. linuxwolf

    I have a conflict at this time next week

  112. stpeter

    I've never seen the word "confusal" before, I like it!

  113. linuxwolf

    but just next week

  114. Kev

    See if you can backlog skim and vote before we decide on date and AOB.

  115. MattJ

    Do I still have time to reject MFR again? :P

  116. Kev

    linuxwolf: Next week is bad for me anyway, so I'm happy to skip.

  117. Kev

    MattJ: You have.

  118. ralphm

    I will be in Brussels next week already

  119. MattJ

    Well I'm +1 on it, you'll be glad to know

  120. MattJ

    Just loading log now

  121. Kev

    Shall we do fortnight today?

  122. ralphm

    who will not be there next week?

  123. linuxwolf

    Kev: wfm

  124. linuxwolf

    I will not

  125. ralphm

    linuxwolf: SAD!

  126. Tobias


  127. linuxwolf

    too much traveling at the end of last year … still recovering

  128. Kev

    I'll be at the summit et al.

  129. Kev

    I'll take that as a +1 from everyone on this time in a fortnight.

  130. Kev

    7) AOB

  131. stpeter

    I'll be jet-lagged :)

  132. Kev


  133. stpeter

    but probably functional

  134. linuxwolf

    "silence is acquiescence" is what I always say (-:

  135. linuxwolf

    none here

  136. Kev

    I'll be trainlagged, but I'll probably cope :)

  137. stpeter


  138. stpeter

    I need to capture votes on XEP 45

  139. stpeter

    and those from today

  140. Kev

    Oh. Sorry.

  141. Kev

    I said I'd add it to agendaness and didn.t

  142. MattJ

    1) present, 2) -1 (afaik this is already possible with the current scheme), 3) +1 (thanks Kev), 4) +1 (Prosody already does this iirc), 5) +1 (and this), 6) +1, 7) ...

  143. Kev

    5b) Everyone ok on the new version of MUC now?

  144. Kev


  145. MattJ


  146. linuxwolf

    I need to read it through one more time … sorry

  147. ralphm


  148. stpeter

    in fact http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/tenth-council/ is the last voting page, so I need to create one for the eleventh council :)

  149. linuxwolf

    will have a new vote before the next meeting

  150. Kev

    linuxwolf: Thanks.

  151. Kev

    Tobias: ?

  152. ralphm

    I just sent my -1 comment to standards@

  153. Kev

    ralphm: Thanks.

  154. Tobias

    Kev, kev?

  155. Tobias


  156. Kev

    "5b) Everyone ok on the new version of MUC now?"

  157. Tobias


  158. Kev


  159. Kev

    Now we're really done then, I think.

  160. Tobias


  161. linuxwolf


  162. Kev

    I'll send minutes.

  163. linuxwolf goes back to e2e

  164. Kev

    Thanks all.

  165. ralphm

    woah, 22 min.

  166. Kev bangs gavel order go words out the so the of

  167. ralphm

    Kev: good luck with that

  168. stpeter


  169. Kev


  170. stpeter double-checks the voting record

  171. stpeter

    I wonder why 114 is Historical

  172. ralphm

    because it existed before XMPP was formalised

  173. stpeter

    yeah I know

  174. stpeter

    but still, it's so widely used

  175. stpeter

    ah well :)

  176. Kev

    Which is the exact definition of Historical :)

  177. stpeter

    yeah yeah yeah

  178. stpeter

    I'm sure it's my fault for writing XEP #1 :)

  179. ralphm

    We'll just drink to that next week

  180. stpeter

    sounds good!

  181. linuxwolf


  182. stpeter

    OK, http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/eleventh-council/ is up to date

  183. linuxwolf


  184. Tobias has joined

  185. Tobias has joined

  186. stpeter

    you know, I'm looking forward to our advancing XEP-0045 to Final :)

  187. Kev

    We may have a way to go for that...

  188. Kev

    My recent review was, largely, only of your proposed changes for the new version, not a complete readthrough, for one thing :)

  189. stpeter

    well, my proposed changes were the result a complete readthrough :)

  190. stpeter

    that's something

  191. stpeter

    it did advance to Draft on 2002-11-21 ;-)

  192. stpeter

    Kev: did you check your changes to 311 into git? I'm probably not looking in the right branch :)

  193. Kev

    I *thought* I'd pushed them up to master.

  194. stpeter checks

  195. Kev

    My local repo tells me I've no uncommitted changes, and no commits that haven't been pushed.

  196. stpeter

    does http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0311/diff/0.0.1/vs/0.1 look right to you?

  197. Kev

    It does.

  198. stpeter


  199. stpeter


  200. Kev

    Thanks :)

  201. stpeter

    I got thrown off because is said "ProtoXEP"

  202. stpeter

    thanks to Tobias as always for his work on the diff tool!

  203. stpeter fixes the status

  204. Tobias

    still suboptimal i think...changed numbering (footnotes and stuff) etc. aren't that interesting

  205. Kev

    I think having a diff of everything that changed is useful.

  206. ralphm has left

  207. stpeter

    http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0311.html updated

  208. Kev

    Thanks muchly.

  209. Zash has left

  210. Zash has joined

  211. Tobias has left

  212. Kev has left

  213. linuxwolf has left