XMPP Council - 2012-07-25


  1. m&m

    t - 05:00

  2. Kev

    Yep, ta.

  3. Kev

    Just finished some (internal) patch review ready.

  4. m&m

    that was mostly a self check (-:

  5. Kev

    This week is a killer. Got lots on at work, plus 301 is absolutely deadly.

  6. m&m

    dude

  7. m&m

    I still haven't finished my slides for next week

  8. Kev

    That's /next/ week :)

  9. m&m

    yes, but the chairs need them "now"

  10. m&m

    d-:

  11. Kev

    Oh well. Once you've got those done you can review 301 :)

  12. m&m

    I was planning to review that on the plane

  13. m&m

    I started to Sunday, and decided I'd rather enjoy my weekend (-:

  14. Kev

    Hope you get the 0.6 version.

  15. m&m

    me, too

  16. m&m

    I don't leave until 15:00 Saturday, so there's time

  17. m&m

    ding ding ding

  18. Kev

    Righty.

  19. Kev

    1) Roll call

  20. Kev

    I'm here!

  21. Kev

    Physically.

  22. m&m

    what, you go all TRON on us?

  23. m&m

    presente

  24. Kev

    MattJ, Tobias: *ping*

  25. MattJ

    Present

  26. Tobias

    pong

  27. Tobias

    present

  28. Kev

    Ralph has been pinged.

  29. Kev

    2) XHTML-IM: Issue call for experience? (For move to Final)

  30. m&m

    +1

  31. Tobias

    +1

  32. Kev

    I'm +1, although someone needs to present two implementations to us :)

  33. m&m

    heh

  34. MattJ

    +1

  35. m&m

    There's Exodus (-:

  36. Tobias

    psi does also xhtml-im

  37. Tobias

    IIRC

  38. MattJ

    Pidgin, Gajim, etc.

  39. Zash

    and Gajim

  40. Kev

    Tobias: I don't think that's true. I think it /renders/ it, but won't produce it.

  41. MattJ

    Pandion, iChat!

  42. m&m

    there's a bunch of clients

  43. MattJ

    Kev, it can produce

  44. m&m

    Adium also does it, at least every other version

  45. Kev

    And how many of these are actually doing -71, rather than just shoving junk in the namespace? :)

  46. Kev

    MattJ: Are you sure? I'd think I'd remember something like that.

  47. Kev

    Although possibly not.

  48. Kev

    Anyway.

  49. Kev

    3) XEP-0308 (Correction) - Last Call? (For Draft)

  50. MattJ

    Gajim says pink

  51. m&m

    Given the discussion, I'd like to see 0.6 come out first

  52. m&m

    (re 308)

  53. Kev

    m&m: Are you sure you're on the right item?

  54. m&m

    /sigh

  55. MattJ

    Do we have two implementations?

  56. m&m

    no (-:

  57. Kev

    MattJ: Swift and Jitsi.

  58. m&m

    no objections to −308 LC

  59. MattJ

    Ah, forgot Jitsi

  60. MattJ

    Yeah, I'm fine with LC

  61. Tobias

    im fine with it too

  62. Kev

    4) XEP-0301 (RTT) - LC (for Draft)? Now, for this I suggested that given the possibly significant changes to come out of the discussion of my review, we ask Council to approve the LC in advance, ready for it to be issued on 0.6.

  63. MattJ

    I'm fine with that

  64. m&m

    I'm fine with that

  65. m&m

    heh

  66. Kev

    I don't know if people are happy with that, but it seems a sensible approach to me (Mark seems to be in a rush and all, and I expect we won't Council next week).

  67. MattJ

    heh

  68. Kev

    Evening Ralph.

  69. m&m

    we need a jinx protocol extension

  70. ralphm

    hi

  71. ralphm

    no objection to 0308 LC

  72. Tobias

    on XEP-0301: +1 on LC for draft

  73. Kev

    (I do note that LCing 301 when it's in such a state of flux and seemingly so far off community consensus feels like a cheat - although expedient if we want these long-term specs using XMPP)

  74. ralphm

    Kev: I'm ok with a LC on 301, although I don't understand the urgency.

  75. MattJ

    Don't try :)

  76. ralphm

    I do know that the discussion is flooding the list

  77. Kev

    ralphm: As I understand it, there are long-life specs under consideration elsewhere (for emergency services and things) whereby they'd like to use XMPP-RTT, but can't have an Experimental XEP in there.

  78. Kev

    Which seems like a borderline acceptable reason to me, but I'm trying to support them as best I can.

  79. m&m

    /nod

  80. ralphm

    if it is just for the label, well, ok

  81. m&m

    layer 9 interjected into layer 7

  82. Kev

    Right.

  83. Kev

    So, that's everything I had on my agenda list thing.

  84. Kev

    5) Date of next meeting.

  85. Kev

    Fortnight?

  86. m&m

    WFM

  87. MattJ

    wfm

  88. Tobias

    fine with that

  89. Kev

    ralphm:?

  90. Kev

    I'll take that as a yes :)

  91. Kev

    6) Any other business?

  92. MattJ

    Not here

  93. MattJ

    Wait

  94. m&m

    just a note that IETF is next week

  95. MattJ

    297?

  96. ralphm

    wfm

  97. Kev

    m&m: That's why I proposed skipping a week.

  98. Kev

    MattJ: I wanted to give that a check-over before LCing it, if that's OK>

  99. MattJ

    Sure, np

  100. Kev

    Unless that one's urgent.

  101. m&m

    meeting is at 15:20-07:00 on 07/31

  102. m&m

    XMPP WG meeting that is

  103. MattJ

    Kev, not at all, you just said on the list you were +1 to LC :)

  104. Kev

    Yeah, that time's not going to happen to me.

  105. m&m

    (-:

  106. Kev

    MattJ: I think I said I wasn't opposed, didn't I?

  107. m&m

    just letting everyone know (-:

  108. Kev

    Yeah, ta.

  109. MattJ

    Kev, ok, if they're different... :)

  110. Kev

    But anything that close to midnight can get in line somewhere after sleep.

  111. Kev

    MattJ: I'm not opposed to the thought, but I'd like to check it first :)

  112. MattJ

    :)

  113. Kev

    Anything else?

  114. m&m

    re 297, I'd like to see the new revision before non-objecting to its LC

  115. m&m

    since we're not dealing with layer 9 issues there (-:

  116. m&m

    nothing else from me

  117. MattJ

    m&m, you too? You proposed the LC...

  118. ralphm nodss

  119. ralphm

    -s

  120. m&m

    well, If Kev says there's a new revision coming, then I want to hold off

  121. MattJ

    No, just that he's going to review the current one

  122. Kev

    I didn't know there was a new revision coming.

  123. m&m

    heh

  124. m&m

    my reading comprehension is down today

  125. m&m

    /sigh

  126. Kev

    Cool, I think we're done.

  127. Kev

    Thanks all, minutes to follow.

  128. m&m

    well, I'm pre-emptively non-objecting to LCing the current −297

  129. MattJ

    Thanks

  130. MattJ

    m&m, I think this pre-non-objecting could be going somewhere :)

  131. Kev

    MattJ: We've done it in the past.

  132. m&m

    its like antidisestablishmentarianism

  133. Kev

    Many times.

  134. Kev

    m&m: Yes, only completely different :)

  135. m&m

    (-:

  136. Kev bangs the gavel.

  137. m&m goes off to figure out how to fake intelligence for the rest of today

  138. MattJ

    If I can manage, I'm sure you can't go far wrong

  139. m&m

    we'll see how it goes