XMPP Council - 2013-05-08

  1. m&m has joined

  2. stpeter has left

  3. m&m has left

  4. m&m has joined

  5. Tobias has joined

  6. m&m has left

  7. jabberjocke has left

  8. Tobias has left

  9. Tobias has joined

  10. Neustradamus has joined

  11. Tobias

    anything important on the agenda for today?

  12. Kev

    The two proposals from yesterday.

  13. Tobias

    do we want to handle them this week or next? might be a bit close for today...

  14. Kev

    Today seems fine, we have two weeks to deal with them after the meeting.

  15. Tobias has left

  16. Tobias has joined

  17. jabberjocke has joined

  18. Tobias has left

  19. Tobias has joined

  20. jabberjocke has left

  21. Tobias has left

  22. Tobias has joined

  23. m&m has joined

  24. Zash has joined

  25. m&m

    mea culpa

  26. m&m

    I will not be able to attend today

  27. m&m

    even if I appear online!

  28. stpeter has joined

  29. stpeter


  30. Tobias


  31. stpeter


  32. MattJ has joined

  33. Thijs has joined

  34. xnyhps has joined

  35. Kev

    m&m: Ta.

  36. Kev

    Right, it is time.

  37. Kev

    1) Roll call.

  38. Kev

    I'm here.

  39. Tobias


  40. MattJ

    Me to

  41. MattJ


  42. Kev

    I poked Ralph, and m&m's not here.

  43. stpeter

    "Harpier cries 'Tis time, 'tis time."

  44. Kev

    2)http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pubsub-subs.html Accept?

  45. Kanchil

    Kev: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pubsub-subs.html: XEP-xxxx: Pubsub Subscription

  46. Kev

    I didn't really get the whole 'id' thing in this.

  47. MattJ

    I think it's so you don't end up with duplicates, for example

  48. Kev

    And I'm not sure that the security considerations should have been copy/pasted from user tune :)

  49. MattJ

    or can easily check for the presence of an item in the list

  50. Florob has joined

  51. MattJ

    The hash isn't correct, I checked :)

  52. MattJ

    It doesn't have a JID in it anyway

  53. Kev

    But, can't you easily check for the presence of an item in the list anyway?

  54. MattJ


  55. Zash

    http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#entity-subscriptions ← What about that format that already exists?

  56. Kanchil

    Zash: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html#entity-subscriptions: XEP-0060: Publish-Subscribe

  57. stpeter

    why not just use UUIDs?

  58. Kev

    Zash: It's a reasonable question - although I think the one-sub per item they're going for might be sensible.

  59. MattJ

    stpeter, well then you can let the server generate them for you... but that still lets you have duplicates of a subscription

  60. stpeter

    MattJ: ah, sure

  61. Kev

    MattJ: But won't you only have duplicates of a subscription if you put them there?

  62. Kev

    Or are you thinking of two clients with a race condition?

  63. MattJ

    With the hash, if I want to see if someone is subscribed to a node, I can just do a simple iq get for that item id

  64. MattJ

    Well two clients is a case it could easily happen

  65. stpeter

    given that we deferred most of the other "User *" specs for lack of interest years ago, I wonder what the compelling use cases are here...

  66. Kev

    stpeter: Presumably they have a use for it, and we don't judge community interest until going to Draft.

  67. Kev

    So I'm not opposing it.

  68. MattJ

    Me neither, it has some editorial work to be done, but I like it

  69. stpeter

    Kev: agreed, I was just curious

  70. Tobias

    i'm with MattJ here

  71. Kev

    3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/http-over-xmpp.html

  72. Kanchil

    Kev: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/http-over-xmpp.html: XEP-xxxx: HTTP over XMPP transport

  73. Kev

    I need to read this.

  74. Kev

    I'm assuming the ultimate aim is to do XMPP over BOSH over HTTP over XMPP over websockets?

  75. stpeter


  76. Tobias

    yeah..who wouldn't want that...

  77. MattJ


  78. stpeter

    probably it's to tunnel HTTP over XMPP-over-EXI

  79. stpeter

    for some reason :-)

  80. MattJ

    It reminded me of this part of an interview with jer: http://prosody.im/pastebin/95529bb1-b125-46ff-ab0e-526f78b4f176

  81. Tobias

    wouldn't shoving it through IBB be way easier?

  82. Kev

    To be entirely fair, I /can/ see situations in which HTTP over XMPP might be a sensible thing to do.

  83. MattJ

    ...in 2001

  84. stpeter

    now, I admit it would have been helpful for our friends in Cuba a few years ago

  85. Kev

    So I need to vote onlist for this.

  86. Kev

    Matt /Tobias?

  87. MattJ

    I'm +1, but as ever it needs some work :)

  88. Tobias

    i'll vote on list too, after i've read it

  89. Kev


  90. MattJ

    My thought on it is that people are going to do it anyway, and it's best to spec it

  91. Kev

    4) Date of next. I can't do next week. Week after?

  92. MattJ

    and this doesn't seem like a terrible solution

  93. MattJ

    Week after is fine

  94. Kev

    MattJ: I'm not opposed to the principle, but I've not read the spec at all, and I want to before voting.

  95. MattJ

    Yep, I understand :)

  96. Kev

    I'll take that as an OK from Tobias.

  97. Kev

    5) Any other business?

  98. Tobias

    yeah..fine with me as long as it ends up in the calendar

  99. stpeter

    as to AOB, the http-over-xmpp proposal raised the issue of whether we can re-use SHIM headers

  100. Kev

    I also haven't read that thread.

  101. stpeter

    heh ok

  102. MattJ

    I've read the thread, but not the SHIM spec

  103. stpeter

    our resident literalist took issue with my suggestion

  104. MattJ


  105. stpeter

    Kev: no worries, we can discuss on the list

  106. stpeter

    maybe XEP-0131 was worded too narrowly

  107. Kev

    I don't have anything intelligent to say here, at least.

  108. stpeter shrugs

  109. stpeter

    yep, understood :-)

  110. MattJ

    stpeter, you speak in the past tense, but it's still Draft :)

  111. Kev

    Although, at a very high level, I'm not sure re-use of 131 buys very much if people don't implement 131 much :)

  112. Kev

    But anyway, I'll try to catch up and comment on list.

  113. stpeter

    was, is, has been, will be...

  114. stpeter


  115. MattJ

    What will be will be

  116. Kev

    OK, we're done then?

  117. Tobias

    i think so

  118. MattJ nods

  119. Kev

    Right, thanks all.

  120. Kev bangs the gavel.

  121. Tobias

    thanks you

  122. MattJ


  123. stpeter

    Tobias: shall I update the calendar to remove next week's meeting?

  124. Tobias

    will it annoy people too much when it's wrong? :)

  125. stpeter

    maybe I'll add some June meetings while I'm at it

  126. Tobias

    i don't care personally

  127. stpeter

    fixing it now

  128. stpeter

    hmm, lots of php5-cgi processes using memory on athena, will have to check into that

  129. stpeter

    er, lots of CPU

  130. Tobias

    wordpress :)

  131. stpeter

    it's evil

  132. Zash

    moar caching!

  133. Tobias

    less dynamic pages

  134. stpeter

    calendar updated

  135. Kev


  136. xnyhps has left

  137. jabberjocke has joined

  138. m&m has left

  139. m&m has joined

  140. Florob has left

  141. m&m has left

  142. m&m has joined

  143. Tobias has joined

  144. Tobias has joined

  145. m&m has left

  146. m&m has joined

  147. m&m has left

  148. m&m has joined

  149. m&m has left

  150. m&m has joined

  151. Tobias has joined

  152. Zash has left

  153. Zash has joined

  154. Zash has left

  155. stpeter has left

  156. Neustradamus has left

  157. Neustradamus has joined

  158. m&m has left