XMPP Council - 2012-09-26

ding?

dong

we are having a council meeting, right?

I thought so

yup

maybe we should tell Kev about it :)

although I seem to have been remiss about updating the schedule :(

stpeter: maybe you can show me what to do on that

m&m: sure thing

I already did

heh

ok

+ MattJ + Ralphm

Balls, sorry.

Hell of a week.

m&m, I was already here ;)

I'll note I was late in the minutes.

Kev: yeah, I'm sure, what with having been on holiday before

I just noticed … sorry!

:)

it's been a long week for me, too

stpeter: The holiday was weeks ago. I need another by now.

Anyway.

1) Roll call.

I'm here, belatedly.

Kev: ouch

presente

here

Here

Anyone poked Ralph?

I did

Ta.

no response

2) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/muc-admin.html Accept as XEP?

Kev: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/muc-admin.html: XEP-xxxx: Multi-User Chat Administration

m&m pointed out problems to me

I don't know if they're problems, per se

I've not read it yet. I need to.

I read it yesterday

just curious why existing admin actions are duplicated

I'm not sure why we need another way of setting the subject.

I should probably fix it up before we publish it, and add more use cases -- I was in a hurry at the time, working on it while commuting and such

Or the other duplications.

i haven't read it yet etiher

I think it's a good start, I have a small wishlist though (that may or may not be addressed in this spec)

I've no objections to publishing

btw

I'm a little uneasy about duplicating the functions without understanding the reason.

But I've not read it properly to see if that's explained.

I'll read it over the next couple of days.

hi

hi ralphm

Hi Ralph.

No-one opposing right now, right?

i'm not...will read it soonish

not now, possibly not ever

Ta.

not opposing

m&m: I'm so very tempted to make a "That's what she said" comment here.

the spec doesn't explain why we might want to use ad-hoc commands for existing functions, although one could argue that it would have been a good idea to do that from the start (and wouldn't require special-purpose code), but I agree that these don't deserve to be front-and-center, perhaps in an appendix

But I won't.

Kev: you need another holiday (-:

Really do.

Kev: I hear November 5th should not be forgot

although I do wonder if we are to mess with this, maybe there are some other things more pressing, re muc

m&m: Very good.

ralphm: If they were pressing, someone would have worked on them :)

(maybe)

Kev: well yeah, that's a good point I suppose

ralphm: we did got through a fairly thorough editorial revision not too long ago

3) Date of next meeting.

Next Wed's not good for me.

Me neither

I'll be offline next Wednesday, methinks

so 2012-10-10

??

wfm

m&m: I rather meant an actual overhaul, that probably no-one actually wants. never mind.

sure

wfm

m&m: If that's a fortnight today, yes.

m&m: I just happened to find this (again): https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=27687

Kev: no, it's two weeks

(-:

/sigh

4) AOB?

yeah, I've got a list sitting next to me

or I thought ...

m&m: we'll talk :)

/nod

m&m: but when you're less punchy

:P

no AOB from me

still didn't get to XHTML-IM, maybe tonight :)

none from me

Fab. I still owe minutes for last week, I know.

Kev: do you need someone to take minutes for you?

The end of madness is in sight, hopefully I'll be more on-the-ball when we've got this release shipped.

us

MattJ still owes an updated XEP-0313 ...

m&m: I can do them, but thanks.

I've just been on site the last few days and haven't had a chance to think.

and don't forget http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board_and_Council_Elections_2012 -- I'm still recruiting ;-)

stpeter: http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board_and_Council_Elections_2012: Board and Council Elections 2012 - XMPP Wiki

Number of Council applicants has doubled since I last looked, w00t.

Anyway. I think we're largely done here aren't we?

:-)

hit it

Thanks all.

graze

calendar updated

Zash, have been working on 313 this morning

stpeter: Thanks.

stpeter: Thanks for doing the GSoC invoice too.

Kev: sure thing!

Kev: do we need to write a final GSoC blog post, perhaps?

Yes. I asked the students to send me links to closing posts of their own, but none did.

So I guess we should write one without.

not today, though

MattJ/Kev: is there an update to 297 pending also>

?

:D

m&m: I vaguely recall I'm supposed to be reading through what's there and seeing if I agree before we request LC.

:)

m&m, you need to update carbons for the new format

yeah, I know

:-(

ralphm, using Google? ;)

If you can get them to fix that, I would really love you

Dave tried

MattJ: what happened

Have to ask him, but evidently it wasn't fixed

I mean, there must be a way for us, the xsf, to get the message across to them that their implementation is broken in this respect

the pdf I linked to above (from freedesktop.org) even mentions that they seem to expect an unavailable presence being sent before a nick change