XMPP Council - 2012-09-26


  1. m&m

    ding?

  2. stpeter

    dong

  3. m&m

    we are having a council meeting, right?

  4. stpeter

    I thought so

  5. Tobias

    yup

  6. Tobias

    maybe we should tell Kev about it :)

  7. stpeter

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

  8. m&m

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

  9. stpeter

    m&m: sure thing

  10. stpeter pings Kev

  11. m&m

    I already did

  12. stpeter

    heh

  13. stpeter

    ok

  14. m&m

    + MattJ + Ralphm

  15. Kev

    Balls, sorry.

  16. Kev

    Hell of a week.

  17. MattJ

    m&m, I was already here ;)

  18. Kev

    I'll note I was late in the minutes.

  19. stpeter

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

  20. m&m

    I just noticed … sorry!

  21. stpeter

    :)

  22. m&m

    it's been a long week for me, too

  23. Kev

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

  24. Kev

    Anyway.

  25. Kev

    1) Roll call.

  26. Kev

    I'm here, belatedly.

  27. stpeter

    Kev: ouch

  28. m&m

    presente

  29. Tobias

    here

  30. MattJ

    Here

  31. Kev

    Anyone poked Ralph?

  32. m&m

    I did

  33. Kev

    Ta.

  34. m&m

    no response

  35. Kev

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

  36. Kanchil

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

  37. stpeter

    m&m pointed out problems to me

  38. m&m

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

  39. Kev

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

  40. MattJ

    I read it yesterday

  41. m&m

    just curious why existing admin actions are duplicated

  42. Kev

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

  43. stpeter

    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

  44. Kev

    Or the other duplications.

  45. Tobias

    i haven't read it yet etiher

  46. MattJ

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

  47. m&m

    I've no objections to publishing

  48. m&m

    btw

  49. Kev

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

  50. Kev

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

  51. Kev

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

  52. ralphm

    hi

  53. Tobias

    hi ralphm

  54. Kev

    Hi Ralph.

  55. Kev

    No-one opposing right now, right?

  56. Tobias

    i'm not...will read it soonish

  57. m&m

    not now, possibly not ever

  58. Kev

    Ta.

  59. ralphm

    not opposing

  60. Kev

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

  61. stpeter

    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

  62. Kev

    But I won't.

  63. m&m

    Kev: you need another holiday (-:

  64. Kev

    Really do.

  65. m&m

    Kev: I hear November 5th should not be forgot

  66. ralphm

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

  67. Kev

    m&m: Very good.

  68. Kev

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

  69. Kev

    (maybe)

  70. ralphm

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

  71. m&m

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

  72. m&m thinks he needs another holiday

  73. Kev

    3) Date of next meeting.

  74. Kev

    Next Wed's not good for me.

  75. MattJ

    Me neither

  76. stpeter

    I'll be offline next Wednesday, methinks

  77. m&m

    so 2012-10-10

  78. m&m

    ??

  79. MattJ

    wfm

  80. ralphm

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

  81. stpeter

    sure

  82. Tobias

    wfm

  83. Kev

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

  84. ralphm

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

  85. m&m

    Kev: no, it's two weeks

  86. m&m

    (-:

  87. m&m is a little punchy today

  88. stpeter notes that m&m and I still need to clean up the ad-hoc commands spec a bit

  89. m&m

    /sigh

  90. Kev

    4) AOB?

  91. m&m

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

  92. m&m

    or I thought ...

  93. stpeter

    m&m: we'll talk :)

  94. m&m

    /nod

  95. stpeter

    m&m: but when you're less punchy

  96. stpeter

    :P

  97. stpeter

    no AOB from me

  98. stpeter

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

  99. m&m

    none from me

  100. Kev

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

  101. m&m

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

  102. Kev

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

  103. m&m

    us

  104. Zash

    MattJ still owes an updated XEP-0313 ...

  105. Kev

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

  106. Kev

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

  107. stpeter

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

  108. Kanchil

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

  109. Kev

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

  110. Kev

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

  111. ralphm

    :-)

  112. ralphm

    hit it

  113. Kev bangs the gavel

  114. Kev

    Thanks all.

  115. m&m

    graze

  116. stpeter

    calendar updated

  117. MattJ

    Zash, have been working on 313 this morning

  118. Kev

    stpeter: Thanks.

  119. Kev

    stpeter: Thanks for doing the GSoC invoice too.

  120. stpeter

    Kev: sure thing!

  121. stpeter

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

  122. Kev

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

  123. Kev

    So I guess we should write one without.

  124. stpeter nods

  125. stpeter

    not today, though

  126. m&m

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

  127. m&m

    ?

  128. Zash

    :D

  129. Kev

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

  130. stpeter

    :)

  131. MattJ

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

  132. m&m

    yeah, I know

  133. ralphm

    :-(

  134. MattJ

    ralphm, using Google? ;)

  135. MattJ

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

  136. MattJ

    Dave tried

  137. ralphm

    MattJ: what happened

  138. MattJ

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

  139. ralphm

    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

  140. ralphm

    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