KevCan we just vote on http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/message-archive-management.html regardless of Matt not submitting it yet?
KevHe posted to the list some time ago that we could consider that his submission if he didn't get around to it...and he hasn't.
stpeterlazy bastard
ralphmare we force-fed specs now
ralphm?
stpeterheh
linuxwolfKev: take authorship … I think I remember MattJ offering that to you at one point (-:
MattJhas joined
stpeterspeak of the devil!
MattJI'm in a conf meeting that looks like it might overrun
ralphmhi devel^WMattJ
ralphmhm
ralphmoh well
MattJI'll try and pull myself out in a few
linuxwolfugh
Kevralphm / Tobias / linuxwolf: Do you guys mind waiting 5mins then to see if MattJ can escape?
Tobiasnope..i don't mind
linuxwolfuh
linuxwolfI guess not ...
MattJThanks
ralphmKev: do you think we have to wait like for the MAM spec?
linuxwolfI have a hard stop at 9:30
linuxwolfMDT
linuxwolf15:30 UTC?
KevThat's 30mins from now.
stpeterright
linuxwolfexactly
stpeterMatt is Meeting Man!
linuxwolfheh
ralphmthat's a great time to stop anyway
stpeterwell, Meeting Man™
linuxwolftoday is my light day
ralphmwe shouldn't need the full time
stpeterworks to get his inbox below 50 messages
linuxwolfis ticked off at the removal of "javascript:" bookmark url support
stpeterreally?
stpeterthat's wrong
linuxwolfyeah
linuxwolfit's a Security Exploit
linuxwolfapparently
KevThat's a little irritating.
linuxwolfit's why I bounce between Chrome and FF at this point
linuxwolfif I could type "http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep45" and have it "do the right thing", I would be happy (-:
MattJOk, let's go
linuxwolfwell, not irritated
Kev1) Roll call.
KevI'm here.
linuxwolfpresete
linuxwolfgah
ralphmhere
MattJHere
KevTobias: Ping!
ralphmlinuxworf: what about smart bookmarks? I usually just type xep 0045
Tobiaspong
linuxwolfI don't want to type the "45" 9-:
linuxwolfI suggest we start with MAM first
MattJHeh
linuxwolfthat's Message Archiving Manager, not Matthew A. Miller (-:
Kevlinuxwolf: Really? OK, I don't mind.
MattJlinuxwolf, Oh, so we have PSA and MAM?
Kev2) MAM
http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/message-archive-management.html
Accept as XEP?
linuxwolf+1
MattJ+1
Tobias+1
ralphm!
ralphm+1
KevAnd MattJ will, on pain of DEATH send the XML to Peter today.
MattJ+1
Kev+1.
ralphm+1
linuxwolf+1
Tobias+1
Kev3) Dialback:
* Where does this live?
* How far does it go?
MattJThe XSF's powers are getting scary
stpeteryow
ralphmwhose death, by the way?
Kevralphm: NaN
stpeterfirst we had POKE, now we'll have SMITE?
Kevlinuxwolf: This was yours, I think?
linuxwolfI suggested it ...
linuxwolfas the work on DNA slowly progresses, we need to have a dialback progressed to a "recommend implement" state, with fixes
linuxwolfnow, I'll defer to stpeter (-:
stpeterheh
stpeterok, I chatted with fippo in Paris at the IETF meeting and we agreed that it would be best to document dialback at the IETF (again) so that we can put all these federation + DNA pieces together in the same place
ralphmthat seems sensible
MattJHmm, ok
Kevstpeter: So is this the authors saying they want to retract the XEP?
stpeterbasically, it appears that for DNA purposes we'll be using dialback as a "transport" for various credentials (dbkeys) and assertions (DANE, /.well-known/, etc.)
fippokev: not yet i think -- actually i have a version with minor bugfixes and a nice new feature
Kevfippo: Ah, you're here :)
KevSo is all we need to do to wait for fippo and stpeter to agree on a new version an submit it?
KevAnd then to move it up to Draft?
MattJTo the XSF or IETF?
stpeteryes, fippo and I need to chat further, but I wanted to socialize the idea of moving this back to the IETF
KevMattJ: I just understood from fippo that he'd like to get the XEP in order first.
KevWhich seems to make sense to me, we can always then deprecate that once it's RFCd.
stpeterpossible, yes
ralphmok, but that case the venue is the XSF, not the IETF
stpetertruly I'd prefer to just get to work on it at the IETF
linuxwolfI just want *something* to progress
fippodoesn't care much where that happens
stpeterlinuxwolf: :)
KevI have, I *think*, no objection to moving this back to the IETF, although I also aren't sure there's a great benefit to it.
ralphmstpeter: have any of the interested parties expressed a preference?
ZashDialback in SMTP?
linuxwolfthe perceived benefit is that all federation basics are by one SDO
stpeterZash: um, no :)
linuxwolf"basics" being a relative term
KevSo, there's no Council action here anyway, right?
Tobiasright...if it catches one it could be made a requirement of xmpp-core-bis
stpeterKev: no Council action needed at this time, I think
KevOK.
linuxwolfTobias: we're thinking this is either stand-alone, or part of the federation/dna draft
Kev4) Obsoleting XEP-0130
No objections received onlists.
KevSo I'm ok with this.
ralphm+1
linuxwolf+1
linuxwolfwell
linuxwolfmaybe move it to deprecated
stpetersure, Deprecated is fine with me
Tobiaslinuxwolf, right..but if integrated in dna, dna could be made a requirement
linuxwolfdot the i's and cross the t's
Kevlinuxwolf: +1
Tobias+1 on obsoleting
KevTobias: But not deprecating?
MattJSame here
MattJer
stpeteryeah, deprecate is fine -- that just means the Council will need to look at the issue again in 6+ months :)
MattJSorry, I was scrolled up
linuxwolfTobias: DNA would be a requirement, if one supports this not-yet-draft thing
ralphmWhy in two steps?
Tobiasstpeter, and obsoleting would move it off any future agenda?
Kevralphm: I think we're supposed to do it in two steps, without checking XEP-0001.
linuxwolfralphm: according to XEP-0001, it's supposed to be a 2-step process
stpeterright
ralphmcan we vote on it being automatically moved to obsolete in 6 months?
linuxwolfsounds good to me
linuxwolf+1
Tobias+1
Kevralphm: I don't think it's going to be a hardship to vote on this again in 6 months :)
linuxwolfw00t … a use for <councilnote/> (-:
stpeterhaha
KevBut sure, let's do that.
stpeterspeaking of which
ralphm+1
KevOK.
Kevstpeter: I've seen no objections, so please integrate :)
linuxwolf<councilnote>Within six months, this XEP will automatically be determined to be Obsolete</councilnote>
Kev5) Date of next meeting.
ralphmSBTSBC
linuxwolfSBtSBC works for me
MattJSame wfm
Tobiaswfm
KevIt works for me next week (mostly) it won't the week after. So you may need to think whether you want to meet without me in a fortnight :)