KevBy my reckoning (the editor team haven't responded to me asking if we're supposed to be voting on BOSH), our agenda today is roughly Roll/Date/AOB.
Tobiashas left
Zashhas joined
m&mhas joined
stpeterhas joined
stpeterlove those short meetings :-)
stpeterbbiaf
Dave Cridlandhas joined
fippohttps://gist.github.com/jamesvnz/6756208 -- this makes me wonder if they seriously abuse the type attribute...
m&moi!
MattJhas left
MattJhas joined
fippoah... they don't -- https://developer.android.com/google/gcm/ccs.html
Lancehas joined
KevHola.
Tobiashi
Kev1) Are we rolls?
KevI'm here.
Tobiashere
MattJHere
Lancehere
KevAnd fippo's obviously not here, as he was talking a moment ago.
Kevfippooooooooooooooo
fippoerrr... yes
KevAssuming I'm right about not having more stuff.
Kev2) Date of next.
KevI can't do next Wednesday
MattJHmm, not sure yet if I can
KevCan skip a week, move it, or have it without me.
KevI'd be inclined to skip a week, given IETF.
Tobiaswfm
Tobiasthe skipping
fipposkip it
Zashthe skippening
Lancewfm to skip
KevExcellent.
Dave Cridlandskips about. Tra-la-la.
Kev3) AOB?
MattJNone here
m&mI have one item to bring up
m&mif I may
KevI note, not as directly business, that the Editors are now functional.
Dave CridlandCan I ask the COuncil members in particular to look at my XEP-0001 change proposal?
Kevm&m: Shoot.
KevDave Cridland: Oh, about that, I note that Council /do/ vote on Humerous generally.
KevThey just do it by pre-approving whatever the author is going to say.
KevWhich is obviously a nonsense. But I don't see a reason to change it.
m&mhistorically, we had a page that collected all of the protocols, and provided short information block on them
m&mhttp://xmpp.org/protocols
m&mhowever, that page (and its children) haven't been updated in several months — possibly years
stpeterprobably years
m&mso my question is, does the council see value in keeping it?
KevA list of registered namespaces seems worthwhile. Pointing to the XEPs in which they're registered seems worthwhile. More than that seems not, to me.
MattJIs this from when we had pages at jabber.org/protocol/*?
Dave CridlandOh... So this probably made more sense when we used the http://jabber.org/protocol namespace.
KevMattJ: Yes.
m&myes
MattJTo be honest it would be nice if we could preserve those links, but not necessary
Dave CridlandSpeaking from the floor, while the XMPP Registrar certainly needs to maintain a list of allocated namespaces, I see no particular reason for anyone else to dictate its form.
m&mwe already have the registrar list
stpeteras I recall, the http://jabber.org/protocol/* namespaces all had pages like this and then we had redirects in place to point those to these pages at xmpp.org
m&mthis is, in some sense, duplicate information
stpeterm&m: yes
Zashhas left
Zashhas joined
Kevm&m: I think this was a straw poll rather than a Council action, right?
Kevm&m: And that we've now done that?
m&mit is, yes
m&mwell, I'm inclined to remove the landing page, and leave the existing directories in place
m&mat least for http://jabber.org/protocol/* links
m&mbut not do any other updates
KevThis seems sensible to me.
Kevm&m: Happy that we're done?
stpeternods
MattJ+1
m&mgrazie
Dave CridlandKev, As for Humorous XEPs, I didn't *think* Coucil approved them in any meaningful sense. I couldn't remember voting on any, certainly. I'm happy with whatever; as usual I'm more interested in documenting what is done here.
KevAOAOB?
Tobias+1
Tobiasnone here
KevDave Cridland: I remember voting on them, but only in a loose sense. I'm vaguely opposed to introducing a new approving body.
stpeterDave Cridland: the Editor would send them to the Council members (off-list, to retain some element of surprise)
KevI think this is outside Council discussion, so let's carry on after.
Dave CridlandKev, OK. Please post that to the list; it'll spark some debate.
stpeternod
KevI think we're done with Council.
KevThanks all
Kevbangs the gavel.
Tobiasthank you
m&mthanks!
KevDave Cridland: Yes, I'll look at them more thoroughly (like, at all), and post to the list.
MattJThanks
TobiasLance, you've suggested adding tags/keyworks to XEPs, right?
MattJdisappears back to 'IRL'
Lancei have no memory of it, but it would be nice to group them, yes
Tobiasyeah..seems sensible, so what kind of groups did you have in mind?
Tobiasjust to get a rough idea
Lancepubsub, jingle, muc to start
fippoc2s, s2s, im, presence, pubsub, muc, jingle would be the ones that come to my mind
Tobiasah..yeah..those seem to make sense
ralphmhas joined
Lancei'd like a very subjective 'this is a minimum you need to use to be a modern xmpp client', but that might be too subjective unless we do a compliance suite for it first
Lancejust something to avoid listing ~400 xeps at once when someone first lands on the page
Tobiasright
ZashWouldn't that be the compliance suites?
Tobiasit sure would ease getting an overview...i'll see what i can do to integrate that in our publishing system
LanceZash presumably, yes. it would be nice to make the xep list filterable by those suites
stpeteroh that's right we need to update the compliance suite(s) document
Lancehas left
Lancehas joined
m&mfippo: editors of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna want your feedback posted to xmpp@ietf.org!
Tobiasthey want you, NOW! ... maybe they'll even hang posters on the walls
m&mooo … that's a thought
fippom&m: actually that reminds me that I promised peter to re-review https://github.com/linuxwolf/xmpp-fed/pull/1
XMPP Council - 2014-02-26