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.
stpeterlove those short meetings :-)
Dave Cridlandhas joined
fippohttps://gist.github.com/jamesvnz/6756208 -- this makes me wonder if they seriously abuse the type attribute...
fippoah... they don't -- https://developer.android.com/google/gcm/ccs.html
Kev1) Are we rolls?
KevAnd fippo's obviously not here, as he was talking a moment ago.
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.
Lancewfm to skip
Dave Cridlandskips about. Tra-la-la.
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?
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&mhowever, that page (and its children) haven't been updated in several months — possibly 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.
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
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?
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.
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.
KevI think we're done with Council.
Kevbangs the gavel.
KevDave Cridland: Yes, I'll look at them more thoroughly (like, at all), and post to the list.
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
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
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
m&mfippo: editors of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna want your feedback posted to email@example.com!
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