XMPP Council - 2013-01-02

Hi Ralph.

hi

m&m: You here?

It is time.

I am now

Ditto

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to this year's first installment of ... The EX EM PEE PEE Council.

1) Roll call.

I'm here.

presente

there

ralphm: Still here?

here

Excellent.

2) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/mep.html Accept as XEP?

Kev: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/mep.html: XEP-XXXX: MUC Eventing Protocol

no objections

+1

I had a couple of niggles with this, but nothing blocking.

+1

(Niggles like the Note: box being wrong, and a typo of MEP becoming NEP)

Kev: sure thing

+1

Sorry, I have a bad connection atm, may pop in and out

Kev, oh good, just editorial?

Of the various approaches to MEP that we've ever had, this has always been my favourite

I think so, although I'm shattered today so maybe I've just forgotten.

It's the only approach that can fundamentally work, I think - although there are lots of things that need to be cleared up.

When room history is limited to stuff a day old, MEP should be limited as well, it interacts with Fast Reconnect, etc.

I still have to read it in detail, and a great thing to discuss in a few weeks

And when you publish to your PEP node, that should be autopushed to your MEP nodes, presumably.

happy new year

But yes, clearing this stuff up in Brussels would be a good use of time there.

Hi Peter, HNY.

3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/hats.html Accept as Experimental?

Kev: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/hats.html: XEP-xxxx: Hats

+1

good to see this in writing now

also no objections

I don't have any fundamental objections to this, although I think that (3) is probably the wrong choice for the format.

+1 to hats

I'm glad it doesn't cover some of the madnessess that I've heard discussed for hats over the years.

ralphm: it took only 2 or 3 years, I think

(-:

3, I think.

I had been thinking of a wrapper around the custom element, but I still have to think that over

ralphm: yeah, I need to give it some more thought too

I think you have to assume that clients aren't going to understand the hats themselves in most circumstances.

the example form maps a hat to nicknames? shouldn't it map hats to real jids?

Kev, right

Tobias: A reasonable question.

Tobias: quite possibly

stpeter, when removing a had, you at least remove by jid in your example

Tobias: Is that blocking?

I had a whole bunch of minor questions and issues, but those can go on the ML after these get published :)

Another fine topic for discussion in Brussels

(I was attempting to implement both the specs)

Kev, nope..could be fixed during experimental imo

waqas, in which client? ;)

Tobias: Servers have to do everything first

For hats I expect many application-specific hats, that generic clients won't do much with, except maybe show their name.

waqas, mimimimi.....

waqas: I'm not surprised -- I wrote the hats spec in a hurry and haven't touched it in several weeks

Like for games

OK, so that's everyone happy with this, I think.

could be combined with bits of binary to add small icons for hats, etc.

Tobias: No, I think that's MEP :)

Aaaaanyway.

4) Date of next meeting.

Next Wed, usual time?

wfm

+1

Yeah

m&m?

double-you eff em

5) Any other business?

m&m: That could be interpreted incorrectly..

none from me

stpeter: Thanks.

OK, with no other business I guess we're done.

same here

Thanks all.

tea, that is

yay

Oh, note... stpeter wrote in the call for talks that council would select from submissions

I haven't personally had time to review them yet, shall we aim to do that next week?

muhaha

I'm completely not on top of FOSDEM stuff.

I'm happy to review stuff (although don't recall seeing enough submissions for stuff to not fit anyway), but I'd greatly appreciate if someone could tell me what to review :)

I think with the start of the new year we should give this new attention

I believe the submission deadline for the FOSDEM flyer is nearing

oh we set a deadline of 31 December

Yes

Have we got enough talks to fill the time?

I'm happy enough to put a talk in if we're short and someone can think of anything interesting for me to say.

But have nothing particularly burning to say.

I'm guessing we'll start with the usual XMPP 101 with some combination of Remko/Peter/me one way or another.

those are for FOSDEM right?

not for summit, the talks

Yes.

k

I count 7 proposals on the summit ml

not sure if people have sent requests directly to peter

How much time do we have in the devroom this year?

11:00-19:00

and the hard dead-line for the submission of our schedule for the devroom is January 10

So we have plenty of room I gather

yeah

it is nice to not have to cram things in a schedule

Some years we fill gaps with lightning talks, which generally get filled

People always have something to say when given the chance :)